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

[Ontario Mom]

Also, was BM calling MG multiple times to find out when she, JP and CC were going to arrive? But at the same time, not answering calls from his own daughters? But answering a call from the neighbor. It’ll take some extreme mental gymnastics for BM to rationalize why his phone records are what they are to LE.

AFAIK, It's never reported that BM called MG multiple times that day to find out when the crew would arrive, or that he didn't answer calls from his own daughters.

Other than taking a call from the neighbor, I don't think anything about BM's phone activity has ever been mentioned in MSM. If there's a link I missed I'd be happy to be corrected on this.

That said, his phone activity (and Suzanne's too) that entire weekend is going to be very, very damning, I suspect.

jmo

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Point of fact there are not "alot" of cases in the US where someone is convicted of murder with no body, and a person who has seemly vanished and only circumstantial evidence. The no-body cases generally have some pieces of evidence that lead LE to believe the person is deceased, evidence of massive blood loss as only one example, and which added to circumstantial evidence is enough for the jury to convict. The courts, however, have upheld that murder cases can hold up with only circumstantial evidence "circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide and the guilt of the accused". People vs. Scott People v. Scott So I, along with others, hope that there is some more direct evidence that will allow a jury to come to a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. Some will be revealed in the proof positive, presumption great hearing in conjunction with the preliminary I assume. The basics to prove are still true: Suzanne is deceased, Barry had opportunity and motive and there is no other reasonable explanation for any of the circumstantial evidence.

 

[SouthAussie]

“The evidence in a solid no-body murder case tends to cluster around what I call the ‘three legs of the stool”

BBM
“The most important leg of the stool is some type of forensic evidence, which includes DNA, such as blood, hair, fiber and fingerprints, or technological evidence including cell tower records, surveillance camera pictures or some other tech that shows someone was or was not at a certain location.”

... the other two legs of the stool are confessions from friends or family (where they reveal they know who the killer is) and the defendant’s confession to police. With strong evidence, prosecutors can establish a motive and the involvement of the accused, demonstrating that a victim was indeed murdered.

No Corpse? No Problem. Notable Murder Convictions Without a Body

 

[TKG]

Point of fact there are not "alot" of cases in the US where someone is convicted of murder with no body, and a person who has seemly vanished and only circumstantial evidence. The no-body cases generally have some pieces of evidence that lead LE to believe the person is deceased, evidence of massive blood loss as only one example, and which added to circumstantial evidence is enough for the jury to convict. The courts, however, have upheld that murder cases can hold up with only circumstantial evidence "circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide and the guilt of the accused". People vs. Scott People v. Scott So I, along with others, hope that there is some more direct evidence that will allow a jury to come to a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. Some will be revealed in the proof positive, presumption great hearing in conjunction with the preliminary I assume. The basics are still true: Suzanne is deceased, Barry had opportunity and motive and there is no other reasonable explanation for any of the circumstantial evidence.

Actually, that is not true. No body murder trials resulted in an 86% conviction rate. When the body is found, or remains it is

Spoiler: Guess

70%

.

Since 1843, 500 no body murder crimes have been tried.
No Corpse? No Problem. Notable Murder Convictions Without a Body

 

[SouthAussie]

According to DiBiase’s list of 538 cases in the U.S. through March, prosecutors won convictions about 86% of the time compared with a conviction rate for all murder cases of 70%, based on Bureau of Justice Statistics. More than half of the cases were tried after 2000.

The conviction rate is high, DiBiase said, because only the strongest no-body cases go to trial and the suspect is often obvious, such as a husband or boyfriend.

Most no-body cases start out as missing person cases, DiBiase said. Many missing person cases involve children or teenagers, and most missing people are located in a day or so, DiBiase said.

But when a person who would not otherwise be expected to leave does vanish, it raises the possibility of foul play.

No body, no crime? Difficult, but prosecutions happen

 

[jakat]

BM pulled what “appeared to be” old love notes, old letters of fond memories after he was accused on social media of having an affair. He wanted everyone to know how much he loved his wife, but the letters were from SM, not from him to her, and they were cleverly photographed & arranged to show no dates on any of them. They didn’t prove how much he loved SM. It sounded like she was remembering better, more loving times. It would actually comical if not for being so tragic. . SM seemed to always be the one with her arm on him, reassuring him all the time. His ego needed that “inflation” from her, or someone, nonstop. Smdh MOO

So true! He's an attention seeker whether it's positive attention or negative attention. He was probably reading here and other places so he'd be able to have statements ready for the public. Unfortunately for him it was only LE and LS who took an interest in what he wanted to say. Everybody else was a meth head.

JMO

 

[Error505]

Point of fact there are not "alot" of cases in the US where someone is convicted of murder with no body, and a person who has seemly vanished and only circumstantial evidence. The no-body cases generally have some pieces of evidence that lead LE to believe the person is deceased, evidence of massive blood loss as only one example, and which added to circumstantial evidence is enough for the jury to convict. The courts, however, have upheld that murder cases can hold up with only circumstantial evidence "circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide and the guilt of the accused". People vs. Scott People v. Scott So I, along with others, hope that there is some more direct evidence that will allow a jury to come to a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. Some will be revealed in the proof positive, presumption great hearing in conjunction with the preliminary I assume. The basics to prove are still true: Suzanne is deceased, Barry had opportunity and motive and there is no other reasonable explanation for any of the circumstantial evidence.

The “public perception” of proof is usually “direct evidence”, which proves a material element of a crime. My grandson, Johnny, was sitting on the kitchen floor with chocolate cake all over his face. The cake is gone. I pretty much know Johnny ate the cake. But.... no one saw Johnny eat the cake. That’s a circumstantial case. The prosecution (me, grandma) needs to prove to mom Johnny ate the cake.


Direct evidence is a clear confession by a killer, a video of the murder itself, or an eyewitness to a murder that was committed. If someone saw BM murder SM and testified to that, that’s an example of direct evidence.


I think most of us who think BM probably killed SM believe he was the only one there when she was killed with no witnesses around. That means this is going to be a circumstantiacase. Most people don’t realize that DNA, hair, body fluids, blood, fibers, fingerprints, all digital data, GPS, cellphone, recordings, etc. are all examples of circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is everything other than eye witness or confessions, iirc, including forensics, witness’ statements (other than witness to the murder), and anything else you can imagine.


The conviction of the majority of murder cases are built around circumstantial evidence. Very few murders have eyewitnesses or confessions. MOO


So the prosecution needs to fit the puzzle pieces together for the jury “beyond a reasonable doubt” to garner a conviction, which I have zero doubt they will be successful doing.


The Extra Added on Charges: I’m following Gannon Stauch case (11 yr old CO BOY) who’s step mother is facing murder1 + a multitude of other charges. DA’s charge what’s valid to charge they feel they can be successful prosecuting, so they should!


This isn’t “be nice to BM week” just in case he’s found not guilty of Murder 1. 70 investigators, 1400 tips, 400 interviews, 135 search warrants later these LE & DA want to get the accused convicted for a long time. Life Without Parole + another 100 years would be fine with me. The more charges, the more to use as bargaining chips to be told where SM’s body is, maybe. MOO
I welcome corrections and changes from the more experienced and legal beagles (affectionate term). MOO

 

[CGray123]

Maybe I am wrong, but even if the defense doesn't put forward that alibi in this trial, I believe the state can still tell the jury, what the defendant said when the detectives asked him for his alibi.

And the state can still bring forward that crazy work trip, etc, even if the defense tries to abandon that as his current alibi

I've been thinking about this, and I believe you're right. I'm betting the prosecutors want very much to tell the jury about BM's attempt to construct an alibi, and then take it apart. It shows deliberation and intent to kill. They knew a good defense attorney wouldn't even attempt to defend on the basis of an alibi, so they added the charge of misleading public officials to assure that the evidence would survive a relevancy objection. I think that all the added charges may have this same purpose - to assure the jury gets to hear the whole story. Hope they succeed!

 

[10ofRods]

We are all different when it comes to this topic. If my husband got me a gift for mothers day, I would feel weird about it. I'm your sexy wife, not your mother. You better call your mom. haha (imo)

Do. you have children together?

Because it starts out with the husband buying a card/flowers/gift when the children are too young to do it. In many families, that's the fallback system. So, if the girls were away, Barry would expected to at least grab some flowers.

But I'm more convinced now than ever that no one was going to be anywhere near "on time" for Mother's Day celebration...

I also think there's an entire subtext that's difficult to discuss, but will come into play.

 

[Error505]

“The evidence in a solid no-body murder case tends to cluster around what I call the ‘three legs of the stool”

BBM
“The most important leg of the stool is some type of forensic evidence, which includes DNA, such as blood, hair, fiber and fingerprints, or technological evidence including cell tower records, surveillance camera pictures or some other tech that shows someone was or was not at a certain location.”

... the other two legs of the stool are confessions from friends or family (where they reveal they know who the killer is) and the defendant’s confession to police. With strong evidence, prosecutors can establish a motive and the involvement of the accused, demonstrating that a victim was indeed murdered.

No Corpse? No Problem. Notable Murder Convictions Without a Body

Excellent Post. I was looking for this. Thank you!

 

[Error505]

Do. you have children together?

Because it starts out with the husband buying a card/flowers/gift when the children are too young to do it. In many families, that's the fallback system. So, if the girls were away, Barry would expected to at least grab some flowers.

But I'm more convinced now than ever that no one was going to be anywhere near "on time" for Mother's Day celebration...

I also think there's an entire subtext that's difficult to discuss, but will come into play.

AGREE ^^^^ Difficult!!!!

 

[CGray123]

The “public perception” of proof is usually “direct evidence”, which proves a material element of a crime. My grandson, Johnny, was sitting on the kitchen floor with chocolate cake all over his face. The cake is gone. I pretty much know Johnny ate the cake. But.... no one saw Johnny eat the cake. That’s a circumstantial case. The prosecution (me, grandma) needs to prove to mom Johnny ate the cake.


Direct evidence is a clear confession by a killer, a video of the murder itself, or an eyewitness to a murder that was committed. If someone saw BM murder SM and testified to that, that’s an example of direct evidence.


I think most of us who think BM probably killed SM believe he was the only one there when she was killed with no witnesses around. That means this is going to be a circumstantiacase. Most people don’t realize that DNA, hair, body fluids, blood, fibers, fingerprints, all digital data, GPS, cellphone, recordings, etc. are all examples of circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is everything other than eye witness or confessions, iirc, including forensics, witness’ statements (other than witness to the murder), and anything else you can imagine.


The conviction of the majority of murder cases are built around circumstantial evidence. Very few murders have eyewitnesses or confessions. MOO


So the prosecution needs to fit the puzzle pieces together for the jury “beyond a reasonable doubt” to garner a conviction, which I have zero doubt they will be successful doing.


The Extra Added on Charges: I’m following Gannon Stauch case (11 yr old CO BOY) who’s step mother is facing murder1 + a multitude of other charges. DA’s charge what’s valid to charge they feel they can be successful prosecuting, so they should!


This isn’t “be nice to BM week” just in case he’s found not guilty of Murder 1. 70 investigators, 1400 tips, 400 interviews, 135 search warrants later these LE & DA want to get the accused convicted for a long time. Life Without Parole + another 100 years would be fine with me. The more charges, the more to use as bargaining chips to be told where SM’s body is, maybe. MOO
I welcome corrections and changes from the more experienced and legal beagles (affectionate term). MOO

Here's a standard jury instruction for Colorado courts. Whatever perception they bring to the courtroom, they will be instructed that circumstantial evidence is as powerful as direct evidence.

3:9 DIRECT AND INDIRECT (CIRCUMSTANTIAL) EVIDENCE — DEFINED

Evidence may be either direct or circumstantial. Circumstantial evidence is the proof of facts or circumstances from which the existence or nonexistence of other facts may reasonably be inferred. All other evidence is direct evidence. The law makes no distinction between the effect of direct evidence and circumstantial evidence.

 

[Skigh]

Do. you have children together?

Because it starts out with the husband buying a card/flowers/gift when the children are too young to do it. In many families, that's the fallback system. So, if the girls were away, Barry would expected to at least grab some flowers.

But I'm more convinced now than ever that no one was going to be anywhere near "on time" for Mother's Day celebration...

I also think there's an entire subtext that's difficult to discuss, but will come into play.

It would be interesting to know what had happened on previous mother's days. Was Mother's day usually celebrated in style by the whole family ? Did Barry ever buy flowers or a card himself to give to her and give his daughters money to buy a lovely gift for their mother?

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Actually, that is not true. No body murder trials resulted in an 86% conviction rate. When the body is found, or remains it is

Spoiler: Guess

70%

.

Since 1843, 500 no body murder crimes have been tried.
No Corpse? No Problem. Notable Murder Convictions Without a Body

Yes the body boosts that conviction rate quite a bit. I am sure Chaffee County law wishes they had found Suzanne.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

The “public perception” of proof is usually “direct evidence”, which proves a material element of a crime. My grandson, Johnny, was sitting on the kitchen floor with chocolate cake all over his face. The cake is gone. I pretty much know Johnny ate the cake. But.... no one saw Johnny eat the cake. That’s a circumstantial case. The prosecution (me, grandma) needs to prove to mom Johnny ate the cake.


Direct evidence is a clear confession by a killer, a video of the murder itself, or an eyewitness to a murder that was committed. If someone saw BM murder SM and testified to that, that’s an example of direct evidence.


I think most of us who think BM probably killed SM believe he was the only one there when she was killed with no witnesses around. That means this is going to be a circumstantiacase. Most people don’t realize that DNA, hair, body fluids, blood, fibers, fingerprints, all digital data, GPS, cellphone, recordings, etc. are all examples of circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is everything other than eye witness or confessions, iirc, including forensics, witness’ statements (other than witness to the murder), and anything else you can imagine.


The conviction of the majority of murder cases are built around circumstantial evidence. Very few murders have eyewitnesses or confessions. MOO


So the prosecution needs to fit the puzzle pieces together for the jury “beyond a reasonable doubt” to garner a conviction, which I have zero doubt they will be successful doing.


The Extra Added on Charges: I’m following Gannon Stauch case (11 yr old CO BOY) who’s step mother is facing murder1 + a multitude of other charges. DA’s charge what’s valid to charge they feel they can be successful prosecuting, so they should!


This isn’t “be nice to BM week” just in case he’s found not guilty of Murder 1. 70 investigators, 1400 tips, 400 interviews, 135 search warrants later these LE & DA want to get the accused convicted for a long time. Life Without Parole + another 100 years would be fine with me. The more charges, the more to use as bargaining chips to be told where SM’s body is, maybe. MOO
I welcome corrections and changes from the more experienced and legal beagles (affectionate term). MOO

I should probably say forensic evidence instead of direct evidence. I stand corrected.

 

[Skigh]

Yes the body boosts that conviction rate quite a bit. I am sure Chaffee County law wishes they had found Suzanne.

Conviction rate No body: 86%
With body 70%

So 16% more convictions in no body cases.

 

[Error505]

Yes the body boosts that conviction rate quite a bit. I am sure Chaffee County law wishes they had found Suzanne.

@Momofthreeboys The conviction rate for “no body” cases is 16 Percent higher than for cases with body recovered. See quoted link below.

According to DiBiase’s list of 538 cases in the U.S. through March, prosecutors won convictions about 86% of the time compared with a conviction rate for all murder cases of 70%, based on Bureau of Justice Statistics. More than half of the cases were tried after 2000.

The conviction rate is high, DiBiase said, because only the strongest no-body cases go to trial and the suspect is often obvious, such as a husband or boyfriend.

Most no-body cases start out as missing person cases, DiBiase said. Many missing person cases involve children or teenagers, and most missing people are located in a day or so, DiBiase said.

But when a person who would not otherwise be expected to leave does vanish, it raises the possibility of foul play.

No body, no crime? Difficult, but prosecutions happen

 

[Error505]

Point of fact there are not "alot" of cases in the US where someone is convicted of murder with no body, and a person who has seemly vanished and only circumstantial evidence. The no-body cases generally have some pieces of evidence that lead LE to believe the person is deceased, evidence of massive blood loss as only one example, and which added to circumstantial evidence is enough for the jury to convict. The courts, however, have upheld that murder cases can hold up with only circumstantial evidence "circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide and the guilt of the accused". People vs. Scott People v. Scott So I, along with others, hope that there is some more direct evidence that will allow a jury to come to a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. Some will be revealed in the proof positive, presumption great hearing in conjunction with the preliminary I assume. The basics to prove are still true: Suzanne is deceased, Barry had opportunity and motive and there is no other reasonable explanation for any of the circumstantial evidence.

See @CGray123 link re: Jury instructions regarding: evidence . Thank you both!

Here's a standard jury instruction for Colorado courts. Whatever perception they bring to the courtroom, they will be instructed that circumstantial evidence is as powerful as direct evidence.

3:9 DIRECT AND INDIRECT (CIRCUMSTANTIAL) EVIDENCE — DEFINED

Evidence may be either direct or circumstantial. Circumstantial evidence is the proof of facts or circumstances from which the existence or nonexistence of other facts may reasonably be inferred. All other evidence is direct evidence. The law makes no distinction between the effect of direct evidence and circumstantial evidence.

 

[windrower]

BM pulled what “appeared to be” old love notes, old letters of fond memories after he was accused on social media of having an affair. He wanted everyone to know how much he loved his wife, but the letters were from SM, not from him to her, and they were cleverly photographed & arranged to show no dates on any of them. They didn’t prove how much he loved SM. It sounded like she was remembering better, more loving times. It would actually comical if not for being so tragic. . SM seemed to always be the one with her arm on him, reassuring him all the time. His ego needed that “inflation” from her, or someone, nonstop. Smdh MOO

Long ago, in another thread, I made a post about the “love notes.” To me, some of the wording seems to be off, like the writer was trying too hard, and I wondered if someone other than SUZANNE had written the notes. Or one of them, the “I remember” one, maybe. I saved the love notes images on my laptop, but I’m away from home on my iPad. So I’ll check later tonight or tomorrow.

Hopefully, they checked SUZANNE’s handwriting for a match.

 

[SouthAussie]

I should probably say forensic evidence instead of direct evidence. I stand corrected.

I agree that forensic evidence would help seal the deal. Though it appears that technlogical evidence is rated as high as forensic evidence (according to a link I posted above).

Maybe the police even have both. We just don't know .... yet.

But I think that with both the police and the DA feeling confident, it is highly likely there is enough evidence to convict.


At a press conference Wednesday, Linda Stanley, District Attorney for the 11th Judicial District, declined to reveal any details from the investigation but said despite not having a body, she is "confident" in the evidence against Barry.
D.A. 'Confident' in Murder Case Against Husband of Suzanne Morphew Despite Her Body Not Being Located

Stanley says the Sheriff’s office presented their evidence to the DA’s office in recent weeks. Sheriff says today was the culmination of a year’s work of investigation when they felt confident they had enough evidence to arrest Barry Morphew and charge him with murder
https://mobile.twitter.com/MarcSallinger/status/1390051774388637703