Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #63 *ARREST*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Momofthreeboys said:
I imagine it would be a cold day in you know where before Barry would talk to that man if you are talking about the guy that used to be with PE. If Barry wouldn't talk to a legitimate journalist like Lauren who has rules and ethics guiding what they publish he isn't going to talk to a guy that gets his social channel viewers with a whole bunch of innuendo. Makes me chuckle. Chris has made it clear that he has no ability to be objective in the least. His prerogative of course. All our opinions are our own opinions.
Click to expand...
I think that the only reason Barry let LS interview him was because he is so use to manipulating and controlling the females in his life and thought that he could easily persuade her or make her feel sorry for him that he let her interview him.
 
swedeheart said:
Looks like there are 2 virtual hearings coming up next week for Mr. Morphew. Perhaps we won't be waiting until August for the AD?! :eek:

Colorado Judicial Branch - Court Docket Search
Click to expand...
Interesting. I think this is likely to be some sort of status conference, as it concerns both cases (murder/fraud). I’m going to message Lauren and see if she has any idea.

ETA: Status conferences are marked as such, so I don’t get why this one just says “hearing.”

Still waiting on Lauren.
 
Last edited:
Momofthreeboys said:
May a case review hearing of some sort….
Click to expand...
That’s what I don’t get. Something like that would normally be listed as a “status conference,” but this just says “hearing.”

So I don’t know if this is a motions thing or what. Maybe this has to do with who is going to be called at the preliminary hearing, or involves arguments on Expanded media coverage for it.
 
In my country, we often have "Mentions" in court. Which are essentially status and other related hearings. With the judge making sure that everyone is prepared for the upcoming Prelim Hearing and Trial. That evidence (complete police brief) has been delivered to the defense team. That the defense team have done what steps they need and want to do.

In this case, it may even be because they have prepared their desired redactions of the AA and are having a hearing to determine what the judge will and will not allow? Perhaps this is necessary to see what will be allowed in the Preliminary Hearing?
 
SouthAussie said:
In my country, we often have "Mentions" in court. Which are essentially status and other related hearings. With the judge making sure that everyone is prepared for the upcoming Prelim Hearing and Trial. That evidence (complete police brief) has been delivered to the defense team. That the defense team have done what steps they need and want to do.

In this case, it may even be because they have prepared their desired redactions of the AA and are having a hearing to determine what the judge will and will not allow? Perhaps this is necessary to see what will be allowed in the Preliminary Hearing?
Click to expand...

I think your first set of theories is probably right on. Judge doesn't want August to roll around and have one of the sets of attorneys say, "We never received X." The lists of evidence have been produced, the evidence provided to both sides by the other, etc.

I don't know about CO, but in CA, the judge would not have a hearing (open public meeting) to discuss redactions or to try and tell a prosecutor what they can present at preliminary (there will be discussions in chambers and the attorneys should heed what is said).

One thing I find strange is that there doesn't seem to be a motion for a bail hearing (that may be automatic in CO as part of the preliminary? I am guessing it makes a lot of sense to wait until the prelim is over to make that decision) - but defense attorneys have been known to try and hurry things along (understandably).

OTOH, if the defense attorneys once again bring up "bail," and "cages," I think they need to file a proper motion (and I bet the judge does too). Such a motion could have been filed (I suppose) but usually that's a matter of public record and docketed as its own item.
 
MassGuy said:
That’ll be decided by the judge following the preliminary hearing, so it’s definitely not that.
Click to expand...

Just a general question, is it a rule that they cannot decide bond prior to the Prelim Hearing? With a possible change to or rescinding of the bond after the Prelim Hearing?

Just wondering because of the whole "innocent until proven guilty" theme ... and it hasn't yet been proven that BM even needs to stand trial. (Though I am sure he will need to stand trial.)
 
SouthAussie said:
Just a general question, is it a rule that they cannot decide bond prior to the Prelim Hearing? With a possible change to or rescinding of the bond after the Prelim Hearing?

Just wondering because of the whole "innocent until proven guilty" theme ... and it hasn't yet been proven that BM even needs to stand trial. (Though I am sure he will need to stand trial.)
Click to expand...
In (Colorado) cases like this, it’s decided after the preliminary hearing. Up until that point, there is nothing the defense can do, as far as I know.
 
MassGuy said:
In (Colorado) cases like this, it’s decided after the preliminary hearing. Up until that point, there is nothing the defense can do, as far as I know.
Click to expand...

Thanks.
I find this interesting, because if a defendant is not bound over for trial .. and has sat in jail for X amount of time waiting for the Prelim Hearing .. one would think there might be legal repercussions for holding the defendant and prematurely denying them their (limited) liberty.

Not suggesting that Murder One suspects should be allowed to roam freely, but I wonder how they get around denying a potentially innocent person their freedom until a Prelim Hearing makes a trial decision.
 
SouthAussie said:
Thanks.
I find this interesting, because if a defendant is not bound over for trial .. and has sat in jail for X amount of time waiting for the Prelim Hearing .. one would think there might be legal repercussions for holding the defendant and prematurely denying them their (limited) liberty.

Not suggesting that Murder One suspects should be allowed to roam freely, but I wonder how they get around denying a potentially innocent person their freedom until a Prelim Hearing makes a trial decision.
Click to expand...
So a preliminary hearing has to be held within a certain number of days in the state of Colorado. I think it’s around 30.

If I recall, Barry’s team needed time to prepare, so it was pushed until 3 months after his arrest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 86 more.
Total: 276 (members: 87, guests: 189)

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
189
Total visitors
276
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,826
Messages
18,246,090
Members
234,459
Latest member
mclureprestige
Back
Top