Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #78 *ARREST*

[10ofRods]

grok is short for "Groucho Marx"

No, it's a word invented by science fiction writer Robert Heinlein in 1961. It's a word I would like to use more often, but most people have never heard it. If people are going to think I'm speaking about Groucho, even more reason not to use it.

"We grok each other," was still said by my college classmates. It was in use throughout the 60's and 70's.

Grok - Wikipedia

I'm only mentioning it because...I wish I could use it hear, because I often grok you, Jondaba.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I don't recall seeing that the other room smelled of chlorine.

I do remember the hotel stating they did not use chlorine to sanitize the rooms though.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

To me, this defense team is like being surrounded by a swarm of little gnats while you are sitting outside reading a book. They keep flying in taking little bites until you are so distracted you can’t follow the story.

Yes, fantastic description, but these gnats have some big ole' teeth.

 

[al66pine]

ATM or Debit Card? Did She have One or Both?

....Do we have a link stating SM did not have an ATM card and that Barry stated HE was her ATM? Thanks! Here’s the link to the article that speaks of BM saying HE was SM’s ATM.Morphew: Hearing continues with questioning of FBI agent

@susiQ sbm for focus bbm Just jumping off your post & other posts re BM as ATM, not criticizing anyone's interp. I asked earlier (last night?) for a quote of LE saying SM did not have an ATM card.

1. ATM card? Is it a card permitting only cash withdrawals from ATM?
If BM wanted to control amt of $ SM spent, an ATM card w fixed daily cash w/d limits would help w. $ limit but would not reveal to him the purchases SM made.

Some ppl saying ATM card are actually referring to a debit card, allowing cardholder to make purchases --- Pt of Sale purchases (point of sales, in-person e.g., stix & bricks stores, groceries, clothing, gas stations, etc) as well as online purchases (Amazon, ebay, Nordstroms, airline tickets, etc). If BM wanted to know what SM bought, 'allowing her' to have a debit card would (generally) let him know. If there were 'masked' debits (such as Venmo, PayPal), he could ask/demand info from her.
Some cards are combos, working as both ATM & debit cards.

If BM wanted to force SM to ask him, to grovel for every dime, then no ATM card, no debit card. {ETA: No credit card.} Controlling action?

2. Now we've got quote: "Barry claimed .... when she needed money she went to him. He was her ATM" from your link bbm. Helpful. TYVM.
But imo, that may be/is BM's flip answer to a different question, as I think BM is tends to give 'responses' that are in fact not responsive to the question posed.

Hard to imagine SM (& dau's?) did not have ATM/debit cards, but sometimes I lack imagination.
Luddite? Not SM w Apple watch, soc media a/c's, etc. { ETA: BM, maybe a semi-Lud. but I'd say, he may encourage cash payments to his business.}

Imo, likely LE could tell by monthly statements, if SM had ATM card, or debit card, or combo,{ETA: or credit card} that BM knew about. I'm still curious about exactly what LE asked BM & said at PH. my2ct

 

[10ofRods]

I don't recall seeing that the other room smelled of chlorine.

I do remember the hotel stating they did not use chlorine to sanitize the rooms though.

JMO

I remember the same.

I think the idea that there was a bleach smell in the PP house is off the table for now, and the bleach in the hotel room turns out to be because two of the rooms are above the indoor pool and apparently almost always smell of bleach (still smelling of bleach four months later).

So bleach is gone from my list. No polygraph either.

The judge has apparently decided that even mentioning what most witnesses said (and their names) will not occur at the prelim. And I get that.

The Spa Store owners may be about to find themselves in the eye of a legal storm, as although they had no receipts or videos, they apparently verbally confirmed Barry's trip to their store on Saturday afternoon at 4:00 pm or later (even though their sign says the store closes at 2 pm).

 

[OldCop]

Old Cop! Glad to see you are here. I want to know what you thought of the last day of the PH? How about the way the judge handled it?

To be honest, I was a little let down. However, I do think there is enough there to bind BM over for trial. I think the judge should have managed the time better. He let the defense attorneys badger their way through and drag out time. I may be a bit prejudiced, but I do have some concerns when the judge appointed for a major criminal trial spent years as a public defender.
Before everyone jumps on me, I believe fully in our criminal justice system. I believe that a person should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I also believe in justice for the victims. I believe their voices should be heard through the means of a fair trial.
That being said, if your job for many years was to “defend the defendant”, in addition to protecting his rights, your role as a public defender is to get the most minimal sentence, the best plea bargain, or even acquittal if possible.
Even the most upstanding public defender or defense attorney is looking for loopholes, casting aspersions, trying to do what they can to get their client off. It does not mater if the defense thinks their client is guilty. This is their job.
Now your judge was a public defender. I am not saying he won’t be fair, but no matter who you are, you bring to your job your own set of personal biases. We want this judge to be able to look beyond his. MOO

 

[OldCop]

Just wondering, why were all those hot tub chemical bottles in SM’s RR?

 

[girlhasnoname]

Just wondering, why were all those hot tub chemical bottles in SM’s RR?

Me too, Suzanne had texted BM on Saturday around 10:30 am IIRC to 'pick up spa stuff"? I think the whole Spa Story is a bunch of bologna.

JMO

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I have my thoughts regarding ATM Barry. I’ve been trying to be quiet about it but my absolute ever first original thought about loyalty by certain members of the family was $$$$$$$$$. What would happen if that was gone? What would happen to those who knew only one type of lifestyle? No vacations, no Nike Air Force ones custom made, no Louis Vuitton’s , no 100 bathing suits, no range rovers. What happens then ??

I don't know but no one knows how they would manage finances once their kids left college. My kids lead a pretty nice lifestyle but understood they needed to make their own futures after college....recently they recalled that those first couple years of being "dead broke" were painful, but they were grateful for being allowed to stand on their own two feet. We can't project just HOW this family raised their kids or pass judgement on Suzanne and Barry's choices. Part of this projection is why my hair raises when the people start speculating about their children.

 

[Seattle1]

Say the AA includes some kind of shocking or inflammatory information that the judge believes could be prejudicial to a future jury OR could drive an overwhelming public reaction if BM decides to plea to a lesser charge (say, in exchange for revealing location of remains). If the judge indicated to the defense that he was very heavily leaning in the "bind BM over for trial" direction but was concerned about the prosecution presenting that information in court at this time (during the PH) - could the defense make an agreement with the prosecutor and judge to allow that information to be considered by the judge in his decision while omitting presentation of that information from the PH and that having doing so would not be later grounds for appeal by the defense?

^^rsbm

I think it's important to understand that there were two combined hearings and therefore two decisions Judge Murphy will rule on in Sept.

It makes no sense for the prosecution to withhold information at the preliminary when the defendant's release on bail is also at stake.

The first hearing, the preliminary, was to decide whether or not BM will be bound over for trial.

IMO, this should be a no-brainer: the defendant was charged with capital murder and has been held in jail since May 5, based on the probable cause arrest affidavit (AA), regardless of the page count and alleged inclusion of irrelevant data. This was the goal of the ongoing investigation for 12 months, and more than 100 executed search warrants!

For BM not to be bound over for trial, you would have to believe that an ordinary person, hearing the evidence, does not believe that SM was the victim of a crime committed by her husband.

That's essentially the standard of proof required for the preliminary -- what an ordinary person would believe. I think WS is a good measure of what ordinary persons think and we are still here because we believe SM was disappeared by BM!

It's going to trial!

The second decision relates to Colorado's unique statute where a Judge is allowed to refuse bail for a defendant accused of murder 1 (capital murder) when "proof is evident or presumption is great."

PEPG is not to be confused with the standard for probable cause!

PEPG standard requires something more than probable cause but less evidence than is required for conviction.

Does Judge Murphy believe the evidence is very strong and the likelihood of conviction is very high? If so, BM will be refused bail.

IMO, the defense did not believe that the state met the standard for BM to be refused bail and therefore wanted him released from jail at the conclusion of the preliminary hearing. They clearly know he's going to trial!

Bail release has been the objective of the defense at every hearing thus far! MOO

(“The mere fact that an information has been filed—or for that matter that the defendant has been bound over for trial—is not equivalent to a determination that the proof of guilt is evident or the presumption is great.”). First degree murder is a capital offense, even in a case where the death penalty is not at issue. See Tribe v. Dist. Court, 197 Colo. 433, 434–35, 593 P.2d 1369, 1370–71 (1979).

https://www.criminal-lawyer-colorad...presumption great,defendant the right to bail.

 

[Lyanna]

No, it's a word invented by science fiction writer Robert Heinlein in 1961. It's a word I would like to use more often, but most people have never heard it. If people are going to think I'm speaking about Groucho, even more reason not to use it.

"We grok each other," was still said by my college classmates. It was in use throughout the 60's and 70's.

Grok - Wikipedia

I'm only mentioning it because...I wish I could use it hear, because I often grok you, Jondaba.

Stranger in a Strange Land

 

[Seattle1]

I am a little bit concerned that the defence is trying to imply that TD might be involved in this, per the Arizona DNA thing. They were so hung up on that! I have no idea if Tempe is where Tyson lives or lived, but I do know he lives in Arizona. Maybe it's nothing, but I can only imagine how much Barry loathes that man, and would love nothing more than to want to seek revenge on T. I would honestly be scared of BM if I were him. (In the same way I'd be scared if I was JL.)

*Just thinking out loud, so totally IMO. It stood out to me how they were hammering on about Arizona. I'm sure it's a ridiculous thought, but it's been popping up all day while perusing the final day of this hearing.

Yes, @swedeheart -- I thought the same! I'd also like to know if the RR was swabbed for DNA before or after it left the state --bound for Indiana.

 

[MrX]

Just wondering, why were all those hot tub chemical bottles in SM’s RR?

Some places sell refillable chemicals, where you pay a deposit for the bottles and exchange them when empty. Same as propane tanks for a bbq grill. We have a box with four empty chlorine bottles in wife's truck right now. I went to do an exchange over the weekend, but the place was closed. That would probably explain why SM told him to get "spa stuff." She could have had them in her vehicle for same reason - meant to get them refilled and never got to the spa place.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

ATM or Debit Card? Did She have One or Both?
@susiQ sbm for focus bbm Just jumping off your post & other posts re BM as ATM, not criticizing anyone's interp. I asked earlier (last night?) for a quote of LE saying SM did not have an ATM card.

1. ATM card? Is it a card permitting only cash withdrawals from ATM?
If BM wanted to control amt of $ SM spent, an ATM card w fixed daily cash w/d limits would help w. $ limit but would not reveal to him the purchases SM made.

Some ppl saying ATM card are actually referring to a debit card, allowing cardholder to make purchases --- Pt of Sale purchases (point of sales, in-person e.g., stix & bricks stores, groceries, clothing, gas stations, etc) as well as online purchases (Amazon, ebay, Nordstroms, airline tickets, etc). If BM wanted to know what SM bought, 'allowing her' to have a debit card would (generally) let him know. If there were 'masked' debits (such as Venmo, PayPal), he could ask/demand info from her.
Some cards are combos, working as both ATM & debit cards.

If BM wanted to force SM to ask him, to grovel for every dime, then no ATM card, no debit card. Controlling action?

2. Now we've got quote: "Barry claimed .... when she needed money she went to him. He was her ATM" from your link bbm. Helpful. TYVM.
But imo, that may be/is BM's flip answer to a different question, as I think BM is tends to give 'responses' that are in fact not responsive to the question posed.

Hard to imagine SM (& dau's?) did not have ATM/debit cards, but sometimes I lack imagination.
Luddite? Not SM w Apple watch, soc media a/c's, etc.

Imo, likely LE could tell by monthly statements, if SM had ATM card, or debit card, or combo, that BM knew about. I'm still curious about exactly what LE asked BM & said at PH. my2ct

Agree and how does this relate to the case? I totally think Barry's comment meant he was the income producer....the bank machine.... which is somewhat true as none of the other family members were income producers on a day to day basis. I think too much is being read into that statement and there is zero evidence that he held all the money and doled it out one thin dollar at a time like a grinch. So many little comments by Barry are flip, innocuous and time wasters to try and figure out if they are real or not real and none of those comments really bolster the case at all. Just my opinion but alot people aren't going to believe some of those statements at face value anyway. Scott Reich made a great comment last night about the difference between "believing" and "knowing" and it's an important point now that the preliminary is over.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

^^rsbm

I think it's important to understand that there were two combined hearings and therefore two decisions Judge Murphy will rule on in Sept.

It makes no sense for the prosecution to withhold information at the preliminary when the defendant's release on bail is also at stake.

The first hearing, the preliminary, was to decide whether or not BM will be bound over for trial.

IMO, this should be a no-brainer: the defendant was charged with capital murder and has been held in jail since May 5, based on the probable cause arrest affidavit (AA), regardless of the page count and alleged inclusion of irrelevant data. This was the goal of the ongoing investigation for 12 months, and more than 100 executed search warrants!

For BM not to be bound over for trial, you would have to believe that an ordinary person, hearing the evidence, does not believe that SM was the victim of a crime committed by her husband.

That's essentially the standard of proof required for the preliminary -- what an ordinary person would believe. I think WS is a good measure of what ordinary persons think and we are still here because we believe SM was disappeared by BM!

It's going to trial!

The second decision relates to Colorado's unique statute where a Judge is allowed to refuse bail for a defendant accused of murder 1 (capital murder) when "proof is evident or presumption is great."

PEPG is not to be confused with the standard for probable cause!

PEPG standard requires something more than probable cause but less evidence than is required for conviction.

Does Judge Murphy believe the evidence is very strong and the likelihood of conviction is very high? If so, BM will be refused bail.

IMO, the defense did not believe that the state met the standard for BM to be refused bail and therefore wanted him released from jail at the conclusion of the preliminary hearing. They clearly know he's going to trial!

Bail release has been the objective of the defense at every hearing thus far! MOO

(“The mere fact that an information has been filed—or for that matter that the defendant has been bound over for trial—is not equivalent to a determination that the proof of guilt is evident or the presumption is great.”). First degree murder is a capital offense, even in a case where the death penalty is not at issue. See Tribe v. Dist. Court, 197 Colo. 433, 434–35, 593 P.2d 1369, 1370–71 (1979).

https://www.criminal-lawyer-colorado.com/overview-of-colorado-criminal-law.html#:~:text=The “proof evident/presumption great,defendant the right to bail.

Very helpful. Thank you for explaining the difference in the hearings as well as CO law & potential outcomes.

 

[jondaba]

No, it's a word invented by science fiction writer Robert Heinlein in 1961. It's a word I would like to use more often, but most people have never heard it. If people are going to think I'm speaking about Groucho, even more reason not to use it.

"We grok each other," was still said by my college classmates. It was in use throughout the 60's and 70's.

Grok - Wikipedia

I'm only mentioning it because...I wish I could use it hear, because I often grok you, Jondaba.

You sweetheart (I think)! Wasn't grok from Stranger in a Strange Land if I remember high school? I was just joking about Groucho.

 

[Warwick7]

ATM or Debit Card? Did She have One or Both?
@susiQ sbm for focus bbm Just jumping off your post & other posts re BM as ATM, not criticizing anyone's interp. I asked earlier (last night?) for a quote of LE saying SM did not have an ATM card.

1. ATM card? Is it a card permitting only cash withdrawals from ATM?
If BM wanted to control amt of $ SM spent, an ATM card w fixed daily cash w/d limits would help w. $ limit but would not reveal to him the purchases SM made.

Some ppl saying ATM card are actually referring to a debit card, allowing cardholder to make purchases --- Pt of Sale purchases (point of sales, in-person e.g., stix & bricks stores, groceries, clothing, gas stations, etc) as well as online purchases (Amazon, ebay, Nordstroms, airline tickets, etc). If BM wanted to know what SM bought, 'allowing her' to have a debit card would (generally) let him know. If there were 'masked' debits (such as Venmo, PayPal), he could ask/demand info from her.
Some cards are combos, working as both ATM & debit cards.

If BM wanted to force SM to ask him, to grovel for every dime, then no ATM card, no debit card. Controlling action?

2. Now we've got quote: "Barry claimed .... when she needed money she went to him. He was her ATM" from your link bbm. Helpful. TYVM.
But imo, that may be/is BM's flip answer to a different question, as I think BM is tends to give 'responses' that are in fact not responsive to the question posed.

Hard to imagine SM (& dau's?) did not have ATM/debit cards, but sometimes I lack imagination.
Luddite? Not SM w Apple watch, soc media a/c's, etc.

Imo, likely LE could tell by monthly statements, if SM had ATM card, or debit card, or combo, that BM knew about. I'm still curious about exactly what LE asked BM & said at PH. my2ct

Excellent well thought out post!

 

[Love Never Fails]

To be honest, I was a little let down. However, I do think there is enough there to bind BM over for trial. I think the judge should have managed the time better. He let the defense attorneys badger their way through and drag out time. I may be a bit prejudiced, but I do have some concerns when the judge appointed for a major criminal trial spent years as a public defender.
Before everyone jumps on me, I believe fully in our criminal justice system. I believe that a person should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I also believe in justice for the victims. I believe their voices should be heard through the means of a fair trial.
That being said, if your job for many years was to “defend the defendant”, in addition to protecting his rights, your role as a public defender is to get the most minimal sentence, the best plea bargain, or even acquittal if possible.
Even the most upstanding public defender or defense attorney is looking for loopholes, casting aspersions, trying to do what they can to get their client off. It does not mater if the defense thinks their client is guilty. This is their job.
Now your judge was a public defender. I am not saying he won’t be fair, but no matter who you are, you bring to your job your own set of personal biases. We want this judge to be able to look beyond his. MOO

I agree with your assessment. At the same time, I am hoping the judge can set aside his personal biases and bind BM over for trial. After he looks for any and every reason to side with defense attorneys on this one, I hope he can put back on his Judge’s robe and rule that BM had motive, means and opportunity and that none of BM’s statements line up.

We are supposed to believe judges are fair and impartial in a court of law. I am skeptical because I see time and again that judges have lost their way in determining right vs wrong, good vs bad, and guilty vs non-guilty.

In the end I too was disappointed but will still feel a shock if the judge doesn’t bind him over for trial.

Thanks OldCop, for your opinion.

 

[Seattle1]

Just wondering, why were all those hot tub chemical bottles in SM’s RR?

It's been years since I discarded my own spa and don't remember the quantity required but perhaps SM added two bottles on hand and still needed BM to pick up additional supplies?

My first impression was that the empty containers were inside SM's vehicle to be disposed of in the community dumpster located across the road outside their driveway.

I thought BM probably collected the spa chemicals on Saturday as SM requested in her earlier texts. BM would have passed the spa store to and from DSi. However, the storekeepers seem to insist that BM made no purchase during BM's late-hour visit.

MOO

 

[CGray123]

To be honest, I was a little let down. However, I do think there is enough there to bind BM over for trial. I think the judge should have managed the time better. He let the defense attorneys badger their way through and drag out time. I may be a bit prejudiced, but I do have some concerns when the judge appointed for a major criminal trial spent years as a public defender.
Before everyone jumps on me, I believe fully in our criminal justice system. I believe that a person should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I also believe in justice for the victims. I believe their voices should be heard through the means of a fair trial.
That being said, if your job for many years was to “defend the defendant”, in addition to protecting his rights, your role as a public defender is to get the most minimal sentence, the best plea bargain, or even acquittal if possible.
Even the most upstanding public defender or defense attorney is looking for loopholes, casting aspersions, trying to do what they can to get their client off. It does not mater if the defense thinks their client is guilty. This is their job.
Now your judge was a public defender. I am not saying he won’t be fair, but no matter who you are, you bring to your job your own set of personal biases. We want this judge to be able to look beyond his. MOO

Judge bashing on various personal grounds seems to abound here. IMO, totally based on personal prejudice. Just FYI, here's what the Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation said when they recommenced him for retention by the voters in 2016 (BBM):

"Judge Murphy is the Chief Judge of the 11th Judicial District. Besides his administrative duties in that capacity, he presides over criminal, civil and domestic matters in his courtroom. Based on the survey results of attorneys and appellate judges, Judge Murphy received an overall combined rating which exceeds the combined rating of all district judges standing for retention. Judge Murphy's overall performance rated by non-attorneys responding to the surveys was consistent with the combined rating of all district judges standing for retention. Judge Murphy was perceived by non-attorneys to be more lenient in sentencing than the combined rating of all district judges standing for retention. Judge Murphy received high marks from attorneys for his case management and application and overall knowledge of the law. Judge Murphy’s calm and respectful demeanor in the courtroom was observed by the Commission during their observations, and he received positive comments for his patience and dignity by survey respondents."