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

[DizzyB]

Would it be so horrible for the girls to become independent, stop fepending ob BM, get financial aid/ work study money in line others with low family incomes? Its appears to be the reality of their circumstance.

I would not even know how to fill out the FAFSA on this. A change in circumstances letter would have to be submitted to the financial aid office and in my experience this could change a package. Hopefully there is a good support system in place that helps them navigate their futures.

Last night, I watched an episode about Brett Parker, who murdered his wife, then killed and attempted to frame his friend. He made a video appeal to his teen daughter before he was arrested, professing his innocence. She testified on his behalf, trying to incriminate the murdered friend of her father's. The prosecution had her read a transcript of a jail phone conversation where it was apparent that she had been coached by her father. He stood to gain almost a million dollars off the death of his wife. Oh and he had a girlfriend. He was convicted. And the daughter still believes he had nothing to do with her mother's murder.

 

[girlhasnoname]

The Case Archive is finally updated!

Justice for Suzanne: Photobucket

The Main Case Archive, before the arrest: Photobucket

Thank you so much for all your hard work AmandaR

 

[Boxer]

I wonder if SM had an insurance policy?

Someone here noted a cancer survivor would have a hard time getting life insurance.

 

[Diddian]

Good point. ^^^
No, it shouldn't.

However, from their viewpoint, it might be horrible.
Some young adults are still supported by parents or family and to become independent is all the more difficult if circumstances change.
MOO.

It would be horrible for more significant reasons than that they are not yet financially independent (at least as far as we know). They would be attempting to become independent while ALSO coping with the continued disappearance and likely murder of their mother and the prosecution of their father for that murder. Those are enormous stressors.

I was financially independent at 17, worked a full time job my senior year of high school, and put myself through college, working 20 hours a week the first two years while also carrying heavy credit loads because I wanted to finish early and begin making decent earnings. But, I did that with only normal stresses - needing enough money to pay tuition/books for those expenses not covered by scholarships and grants and to pay for rent/utilities/food. I cannot even begin to imagine having the motivation or the mental and emotional wherewithal to do that under the circumstances these two young women currently suffer.

If it were me at that age, I tend to think it would feel as though the world had stopped on the day my mother disappeared. And then it would feel as though that stopped world was badly shaken on the day my father was arrested for it.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I wonder if SM had an insurance policy?

If she had one prior to her second bout with cancer, the insurance company cannot cancel. I believe she definitely had one btw.

• A legitimately issued life insurance policy cannot be canceled due to an illness that developed after it was issued
• If the insured knew of an illness and failed to disclose it, there can be a problem
• Once issued, a life insurance policy can only be terminated for non-payment of the premium.

Can life insurance be cancelled because of illness?

 

[10ofRods]

How can it be used to successfully apeal? There are no damages as it hasn't been released.

I'm confused, can someone expound?

On Constitutional grounds. Fourth amendment in particular. Precedents and the new Criminal Code change.

Over 6000 such appeals about suppression of AA's have been filed in CO in the past decade (I believe that's the time period - someone posted the link upthread). Almost 4000 of those were then overturned by the CO Supreme Court. So the State took note of the fact that their Criminal Code was producing far too many appeals of this type.

And now, there's another one.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

On Constitutional grounds. Fourth amendment in particular. Precedents and the new Criminal Code change.

Over 6000 such appeals about suppression of AA's have been filed in CO in the past decade (I believe that's the time period - someone posted the link upthread). Almost 4000 of those were then overturned by the CO Supreme Court. So the State took note of the fact that their Criminal Code was producing far too many appeals of this type.

And now, there's another one.

Well, LOL, if Colorado can't figure out how the other 49 states handle document suppressions that doesn't bode well in general or the problem isn't suppression it's the judges in the state.

 

[Synergizer Bunny]

Would it be so horrible for the girls to become independent, stop fepending ob BM, get financial aid/ work study money in line others with low family incomes? Its appears to be the reality of their circumstance.

The older daughter has now graduated from college. She is in a great position to get a job and support herself. The younger just graduated from high school.

Hopefully, she will go to college right away. If she is lucky, maybe, money has been put away for her to use for college. If not, she should immediately be applying for loans, grants, scholarships and aid. I think that she has adult support in the area. Hopefully, they will guide her through the process.

I actually think, as far as succeeding, they can do it. I hope that they both are in therapy to help them deal with the emotion turmoil that is not within their control.

JMO.

 

[swedeheart]

 

[Deleted member 222031]

On Constitutional grounds. Fourth amendment in particular. Precedents and the new Criminal Code change.

Over 6000 such appeals about suppression of AA's have been filed in CO in the past decade (I believe that's the time period - someone posted the link upthread). Almost 4000 of those were then overturned by the CO Supreme Court. So the State took note of the fact that their Criminal Code was producing far too many appeals of this type.

And now, there's another one.

And how ironic is it that the judge in this case is using the remedy enacted to prevent denying public access - Rule 55.1 - to justify not redacting and releasing an arrest affidavit in what will surely be a capital murder trial.

Changing the law & rules is not enough! The history of sealing and suppression in CO is still firmly in place. It's just that now the judge is required to release his reasoning in a public order.

The CO Supreme Court is going to be dealing with appeals from criminal cases for a long time to come. Because weighing a defendant's rights against the presumption of release is still heavily weighed in the defendant's favor.

IRONY WARNING: BM can't get a fair trial because witnesses will be badgered and refuse to testify or change their testimony, his daughters will suffer immeasurably even from a redacted AA, the jury pool will be tainted because they will all be biased! Oh my, the horrors unleashed by the public's presumptive right to know why this perp is in jail. How can a free society tolerate such injustice against an alleged murderer? How could any judge sign off on an AA predominately lacking in evidence (according to the trial judge). Just asking on behalf of the poor guy sitting in a concrete cage, eating baloney sandwiches...boo hoo.

 

[jondaba]

It would be horrible for more significant reasons than that they are not yet financially independent (at least as far as we know). They would be attempting to become independent while ALSO coping with the continued disappearance and likely murder of their mother and the prosecution of their father for that murder. Those are enormous stressors.

I was financially independent at 17, worked a full time job my senior year of high school, and put myself through college, working 20 hours a week the first two years while also carrying heavy credit loads because I wanted to finish early and begin making decent earnings. But, I did that with only normal stresses - needing enough money to pay tuition/books for those expenses not covered by scholarships and grants and to pay for rent/utilities/food. I cannot even begin to imagine having the motivation or the mental and emotional wherewithal to do that under the circumstances these two young women currently suffer.

If it were me at that age, I tend to think it would feel as though the world had stopped on the day my mother disappeared. And then it would feel as though that stopped world was badly shaken on the day my father was arrested for it.

Diddian, regrettably, this a post-GeorgeFloyd-pandemic-work ethic world. Everything that applied in our youth is out the window. No guide-posts remain.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

The question PE brings to the forefront is whether Judge Murphy signed the AA that led to the arrest of BM. And, if he did, why does he question its content now, as a finder of fact, instead of before it was signed.

PE contacted the courts and was told the identity of the judge who signed the AA is sealed. (Of course it is!)

 

[MassGuy]

The question PE brings to the forefront is whether Judge Murphy signed the AA that led to the arrest of BM. And, if he did, why does he question its content now, as a finder of fact, instead of before it was signed.

PE contacted the courts and was told the identity of the judge who signed the AA is sealed. (Of course it is!)

It’s my understanding that the DA asked for the arrest warrant to be sealed, so as not to tip off BM via a court filing that he was about to be arrested.

The justification was that he was a flight risk due to the liquidation of assets, and him telling people that he had plans to move to Arizona.

So I could see the judge reading through the AA, realizing at the time that some of the content was problematic, but signing it anyways because it both met the burden, and time was of the essence.

 

[10ofRods]

And I can see how a judge might simply want to skip the time-consuming and money-eating process that would be involved in redaction.

It'll be much easier to figure out what to redact once they go through the preliminary hearings.

The question PE brings to the forefront is whether Judge Murphy signed the AA that led to the arrest of BM. And, if he did, why does he question its content now, as a finder of fact, instead of before it was signed.

PE contacted the courts and was told the identity of the judge who signed the AA is sealed. (Of course it is!)

Because it wasn't his job to figure out the entire investigation and its factuality. Arrests usually happen when a few central factual boxes are clicked (and I think the possibility of flight risk had many or all of its boxes checked).

The Judge signed an arrest warrant, based on the Affidavit. He didn't write the affidavit nor can he edit a sworn affidavit - he can direct redaction, but all sides need to confer about that. Which he doesn't want to do. Because time and money matter to the Court.

IOW, Judges do not sign other people's sworn statements. We don't even know who swore that statement - but they did so under penalty of perjury and the only way to redact anything from someone else's sworn statement is to have hearings/process. The media is now asking for more process - but that won't affect what goes on in August (too soon).

 

[Deleted member 222031]

And I can see how a judge might simply want to skip the time-consuming and money-eating process that would be involved in redaction.

It'll be much easier to figure out what to redact once they go through the preliminary hearings.

But, in this case, the content of the AA is one of the judge's reasons for withholding its release to the public, as redaction would be too burdensome after the arrest, as well, in the judge's opinion.

What say you on that point, assuming this judge signed off on the AA?

 

[Momofthreeboys]

But, in this case, the content of the AA is one of the judge's reasons for withholding its release to the public, as redaction would be too burdensome after the arrest, as well, in the judge's opinion.

What say you on that point, assuming this judge signed off on the AA?

If this judge signed off on it he must not have read all 130 pages LOL when he signed the arrest warrant. I suspect it was not this judge.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

If this judge signed off on it he must not have read all 130 pages LOL when he signed the arrest warrant. I suspect it was not this judge.

LOL

 

[Diddian]

Mike King has greater confidence in the impartiality of the process for choosing and evaluating judges than I do. Given that this DA ran as a Republican and replaced a Democrat who previously held the office and given what appears to be an admonishment of the DA in the judge's order, I think it is worth a look to see how judge's are selected and retained in CO and to see who is overseeing the evaluation process.

In Colorado, State and District judges are not elected; they are nominated and appointed by politically elected leaders on the basis of a "merit system." After a preliminary period (2 years), their retention appears on the ballot, but they do not run against anyone. If voters elect not to retain them, the policitally elected leaders appoint another to replace them. Voters do not themselves elect judges as happens in many other states.

Judges are evaluated by attorneys active in their courts. In Districts where more than 500 attorney qualify, those who evaluate are chosen randomly. In smaller districts where fewer attorneys qualify, all may evaluate.

The evaluation questionnaires are prepared by State and District Commissions on Judicial Performance. Here is how those members are selected (from FAQ on their website):

State Commission has 11 citizen volunteer Commission members – 6 non-attorneys and 5 attorneys.

• N-A’s at State Commission selected by Governor (2), House and Senate majority leaders (2), and House and Senate minority leaders (2);
• A’s at State Commission selected by CJ (2), Governor (1), House and Senate leaders (2).
• So, 7 of the 11 State Commission members are selected by D’s and 2 more by a CJ who was appointed by a D governor. 2 State Commission members are selected by R’s.

Each District Commission has 10 citizen volunteer commissioners – 6 non-attorneys and 4 attorneys.

• N-A’s at District Commissions selected by Governor (2), House and Senate majority leaders (2), and House and Senate minority leaders (2).
• A’s at District Commissions selected by CJ (2); House and Senate majority leaders (2).
• So, 6 of the 10 Commission members at each District are selected by D’s and 2 more by a CJ who was appointed by a D governor. 2 of each District’s Commissioners are selected by R’s.

Who selects Commission members?

Chief Justice (nonpartisan office; appointed by previous Governor Hickenlooper, D); the CJ appoints two attorneys to the State and District Commissions (so 2 to the State and 2 to each District).

Governor (D elected 2018; previous was D too) appoints one attorney and two non-attorneys to the State Commission and two attorneys to the District Commissions (so 3 to the State and 3 to each District).

Speaker of the House and President of the Senate (both D’s) appoint one attorney and one non-attorney to the State and District Commissions (so 4 of the State and 4 of each District);

House Minority Leader and Senate Minority Leader (R’s) each appoint one non-attorney to the State and District Commissions (so 2 to the State and 2 to each District).

IMO, given the one-party control of judicial nomination, appointment, and evalution, the case can be made even more than in many other states for public disclosure in the interest of transparency.

ETA:

Link to Commissions on Judicial Performance, FAQ's:
Commissions on Judicial Performace - Frequently Asked Questions

Link to Market Decisions Research, Judicial Performance Evaluation Surveys:
Judicial Performance Evaluation Surveys | Market Decisions Research

 

[Ontario Mom]

If this judge signed off on it he must not have read all 130 pages LOL when he signed the arrest warrant. I suspect it was not this judge.

It doesn't really make much sense to me that the same judge who signed the AA then turns around and says what he does about it. Like, oh wow, look at all this stuff, all these pages, in this AA that I signed myself.

No, that doesn't make sense.

jmo

 

[10ofRods]

But, in this case, the content of the AA is one of the judge's reasons for withholding its release to the public, as redaction would be too burdensome after the arrest, as well, in the judge's opinion.

What say you on that point, assuming this judge signed off on the AA?

He did not "sign off" on the affidavit.

I think you're misunderstanding what an affidavit is. An affidavit was filed with the Chaffee County Court system, requesting the arrest of one Barry Morphew. The affidavit is written either entirely by LE (usually conferring with the DA). One person collects all the various reports, each of which is also sworn to under penalty of perjury (when police, CBI and FBI make reports, those reports are considered factual based on the signature of an actual LE investigator). NO judge weighs in, at this point in the proceedings, on whether all those LE people are nuts, are wrong, are non-objective, etc.

When the lead investigator puts their signature on it and tells the Judge, in essence, "I swear that all of this is true," all the Judge is going to decide on is whether there is enough in it to warrant an arrest.

The Judge does not question the investigator formally. The Judge is neither a prosecutor nor a defense attorney. The Judge is not the trier of fact in this case (but the Judge will, during the proceedings, determine which evidence is allowed under the rules of evidence). An AA is not evidence. It is a request from the DA/LE to arrest someone.

The Judge agreed with the request, and at the time, the prosecution also agreed to have it sealed (because they didn't want to tip off Barry, obviously - I believe MassGuy just stated this, above).

The media want it unsealed. The prosecution raised no objection to having it remain sealed, however. The media are not primary parties in this case. The prosecution and the defense apparently agreed to wait to have the AA released until September (after evidentiary proceedings make the entire case much better fleshed out, so to speak). Everyone knows that an AA is biased - its only goal is to get the person (Barry) arrested. And the Judge simply agreed, as Judges do day-in and day-out, often 365 days a year - that yep, there was enough in there to arrest Barry. AA served its purpose.

The Judge did not "sign off" on the AA. The Judge read the AA and drew a conclusion that there was enough of evidentiary value to arrest Barry Lee Morphew on a charge of First Degree Murder, with deliberation (and 4 other charges, I believe).

Now the Judge turns to his main task, which is assuring a fair trial. In no way does issuing an arrest warrant mean that the Judge agreed with everything in the AA or thought that everything in the AA would make it to trial as evidence (that almost never happens).

I have myself provided affidavits in criminal court proceedings (and I'm not LE, I was asked by the Court on various occasions to weigh in on certain matters in which the Court decided I was "expert"). I take it very seriously and do not put anything into a sworn affidavit that I do not believe to be true. LE did the same thing - they believe everything in the AA to be true (even if not relevant or admissible) because that's how the system works.

Not once has an affidavit that I've written made it to court as "evidence." And not once have I been called to the stand. But in each case, the Judge conferred with me and let me know the way in which he used the affidavit in the proceedings. I have been asked to provide affidavits by both prosecution and (mostly) defense attorneys. One Judge did ask me to if I would testify if needed and of course I said yes, but that case ended in a plea bargain (and the Judge said my work helped get that done - even though I knew nothing about the actual facts of the case and was providing research on a topic the Judge felt he needed expertise in order to do his job).

Judges read affidavits, weigh them in their minds, and then make life-changing decisions for persons like Barry Morphew, who is now a criminal defendant in a very serious matter.