Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #11

[Dave F.]

bbm
ITA.
Excellent post !
Thank you.

Agreed-- that's not how it works, and anyone thinking it is, is denying the legal process and the wheels of true justice.
This is not about how some people 'feel'.
It's about following provable evidence.
LE had something compelling to dig up a homeowner's foundation and take items out of the husband's home.
Not to mention impounding vehicle(s) and phones as well as sifting through a digital trail.
MOO

Referring back to the recent Colorado missing person case that turned into a homicide investigation, a judge signed the first search warrant of her residence (No. 18-103) based solely on LE's account of steps they had taken to determine that she was missing. The return showed that LE took into evidence her IPAD and charger, a notebook of passwords, and a grocery receipt. IMO
Colorado Judicial Branch - Teller - Cases of Interest - The People of the State of Colorado v. Patrick Frazee

 

[justtrish]

Do you honestly believe a Judge signed a search warrant based on LE’s desire to make BM the “culprit?” That’s just not how it works. LE’s job is to discover WHY SM disappeared and WHO is involved. If it appears that LE have all eyes on BM, I’d have to conclude they’ve found something very suspicious about BM’s “story.” If he has been caught in a lie he will of necessity become a suspect, whether or not he is called that publicly. Even if this turns out different than many of us expect, LE must follow where the evidence takes them, until it does not, at which time they would shift gears. For the time being, it appears they’re in “first gear” and that is BM.

Let's just say a tip was called in or if even LE interviewed BM and he stated this is a job he did the previous week. The own of that property may have even called to say BM worked on my home last week. Let's say he gives permission for LE to come look and they use the ground penetrating radar during that owner consented look. They see something suspicious.. then they go to a judge with a warrant. I don't think it's any different than having permission to do a basic search of a house or a car and seeing something suspicious and then getting a warrant. That cause for the warrant is what is found during the owner consented search.

 

[Feistyomi]

bbm
ITA.
Excellent post !
Thank you.

Agreed-- that's not how it works, and anyone thinking it is, is denying the legal process and the wheels of true justice.
This is not about how some people 'feel'.
It's about following provable evidence.
LE had something compelling to dig up a homeowner's foundation and take items out of the husband's home.
Not to mention impounding vehicle(s) and phones as well as sifting through a digital trail.
MOO

JMO respectfully disagree, I would hope that all of these would be SOP even the slab, especially if the slab owner called it in.

I do not know whether clearing someone takes longer or less time to do?

I also believe LE has been ruling out all other scenarios simultaneously. JMO

 

[RickshawFan]

In the begining I wondered about walking after a wreck----but LE dogs picked up no scent of hers.
That lead me back to the house again.

If she walked after any kind of bike wreck and she has bike stuff like someone wants us to think..... bike shoes have cleats that stick out. They are not for walking. Some bike shoes are horrible to walk in even/especially on a hard surface. She certainly wouldn't get far in them. Plus, she would have left very tell-tale shoe prints SOMEWHERE.

 

[Lori Cooper]

Kay I respect your opinion and hope you are right. I want you to be right.

We don’t know what LE knows. I found it strange too that everyone dissects the way a person looks or sounds or stands (body language) and then when Barry did the right things, it was said he was casual, aloof, non-caring. I don’t know.

What LE will base their decision on will be facts and evidence, not what everyone else has to say. You are just as entitled to your opinion as everyone else.

I’m still waiting on evidence to get me off the fence.

I'm holding out hope as well, that BM is innocent. Maybe it's my hope that this couple did have a beautiful life and that he wouldn't do anything to the person he loves. I have a different viewpoint on the points that have been critiqued here, but at times I feel like a salmon trying to swim upstream against the current (differing opinions). I have listened to those opinions and I can see how they can make sense, but for now, I will remain on the fence.

 

[RickshawFan]

Another thing that puzzles me- why would the neighbor assume she went on a bike ride?

If I went to a neighbor's house, knocked and didn't hear anything inside, I am not so sure I would go into anyone's garage to look for a bike, know what I mean? That house is in a remote area, and with no one else home most of the day with Suzanne, I would think the first thing I would do is call LE and not enter the home or garage, for safety sake.

I wonder if the front or back door was opened. Did she go inside or open the door to yell her name? Did she check the house to see if maybe there was a medical emergency that Suzanne needed help?

How did this neighbor know enough to look for her bike? Someone, in my opinion, had to put the bug in her ear to look for her bike, know what I mean? I think this is the part that bothers me the most. LE checked right away that trail and maybe found her bike (not a confirmed fact yet by LE) and eventually a personal item closer to home. I would be shocked if any of my neighbors went in my garage to look for my bike if they didn't see me.

It just seems like someone panicked to call LE so quickly.

GREAT way to articulate what I've been trying to say!

 

[susiQ]

You know, I have been thinking about the fact that perhaps Barry no longer really loved Suzanne. Perhaps he just fell out of love, does not need to be because of another women. It happens, maybe it’s been years since he has not been IN
LOVE with her. So then perhaps you can see where it may be possible he was involve do in her disappearance. I have always, always disliked Facebook for the very fact that most of it is a true fake. That is what we the public are to see, how very happy everyone is in photos and most times they are miserable.

Lots of people “fall out of love” for various reasons. They get a divorce. IF BM is involved in SM’s disappearance, WHY wasn’t divorce an option? Another woman? Shady assests, mountain of debt she was not aware of? Things he couldn’t explain to a divorce attorney? Fear of SM knowing/discovering something that was criminal? SO many questions.

Just speculation, as always,

 

[Feistyomi]

bbm
ITA.
Excellent post !
Thank you.

Agreed-- that's not how it works, and anyone thinking it is, is denying the legal process and the wheels of true justice.
This is not about how some people 'feel'.
It's about following provable evidence.
LE had something compelling to dig up a homeowner's foundation and take items out of the husband's home.
Not to mention impounding vehicle(s) and phones as well as sifting through a digital trail.
MOO

JMO, I reread your post and now understand your info, I am not LE and I have never gone in depth on these issues, as I assume there are constant revisions and variations. I trust LE to be on top of these issues. For my info, if husband granted permission to search anything and anywhere, wouldn’t LE still need search warrant to cover any potential? IOW I think LE must take these steps even if they do not think spouse Is suspect, but until spouse makes himself a suspect, they can’t do this w/ o cause or consent? JMO

 

[K9Enzo]

If we're discussing their marriage - perhaps SM was over the relationship.

 

[LietKynes]

JMO respectfully disagree, I would hope that all of these would be SOP even the slab, especially if the slab owner called it in.

I do not know whether clearing someone takes longer or less time to do?

I also believe LE has been ruling out all other scenarios simultaneously. JMO

Hi, Feistyomi; you know I enjoy reading your posts.

Are you saying that it's possible LE and the fbi came in and broke up that concrete based solely on the possibility that the homeowner called it in as in ---"BM came and did some work recently; you have my permission to do a thorough search including under the cement." ???

I am thinking there had to be more to it than that.
Hope that's clear.
My posts aren't always succinct.

Here's another thought..... years and years ago there was a movie called (I think) "Vanishing act", with Elliot Gould and Margot Kidder.
In it, the husband was so positive that his missing wife --who according to him was a terrible driver -- had possibly driven into a ravine.
He harped on the possibilities so much that he began to look suspicious.
Eventually she was found deceased and he was arrested for her murder.
It could be a similar pattern here.
Although more of a 'look over there' and not here.

And my .02 is that LE do not appear to be looking at an abductor nor an animal attack.
The waiting for updates is difficult.
Imo.

 

[NervousNellie]

If we're discussing their marriage - perhaps SM was over the relationship.

Yes, please, let's talk about anything other than whether BM was in the creek!
(I kid, people! Don't get angry with me!)

 

[Fireflize]

That is exactly what I wanted to know. Did he see him in the creek?

Because I watched the video where he thinks BM is in the woods watching him. TD is standing near what he believes is BM’s truck, and it’s raining.

Later—close by, same day—TD is filming himself and sees BM drive by in the truck. He states in that moment that BM looks wet and upset. Then after that, the story changed to something like BM must’ve been in the creek.

All of this is MOO and my recollection of the video. I may be recalling something incorrectly. I’m genuinely curious if TD ever said he actually saw BM in the creek.

MOO

I too am going by memory and my impression of what was said. That being said, if BM was not in the creek, but in the tree, in the rain, long enough to be described as soaked, that seems strange as well. Moo

 

[Daisyeve]

I would like to add a reason I believe SM did not go on a Sunday AM bike ride. One of my sons is an avid mountain biker. When he was in college on a camping trip with friends he decided to bike on a trail alone while his friends were doing something else. Unfortunately he hit something on the trail, fell off his bike and broke his ankle. His phone went over the edge of the trail down a steep hill so he couldn’t call for help. It took him hours to limp and crawl back to the campsite while experiencing crushing pain. This happened on a Sunday morning and he encountered no one on the trail. Lesson learned and one he had always adhered to before this: Never go mountain biking alone!! This is why I do not believe SM went for a bike ride in a mountainous area alone on a Sunday morning before church or anytime the day she vanished.

 

[NervousNellie]

I too am going by memory and my impression of what was said. That being said, if BM was not in the creek, but in the tree, in the rain, long enough to be described as soaked, that seems strange as well. Moo

Why did BM have to be in the trees? Couldn't he have come from further up the road (from beyond where TD started that video)?? Just because TD says that is the only direction he could have come, does not mean it is true - it just means that was the only way TD considered.

 

[MrX]

Lots of people “fall out of love” for various reasons. They get a divorce.

Not always. Most of the couples I know, my wife and I included, are unhappy. But we stay. I am always kind of jealous of people that have the courage to get divorced.

 

[LietKynes]

I too am going by memory and my impression of what was said. That being said, if BM was not in the creek, but in the tree, in the rain, long enough to be described as soaked, that seems strange as well. Moo

bbm
Agreed.

Why ?
Looking for something ?
If he was searching, that area had been thoroughly searched by LE and other organizations excluding the fire dept.

NG's show said the SAR dogs were 'inconclusive'; as in may or may not have found a scent.

Query : Would a bike of Suzanne's thrown down into a ravine leave a scent trail if thrown from a car or walked to that site ?
Let's say a random stranger abducted her and wanted to stage a scene... would bringing her bike to that location leave a scent trail ?

 

[Fireflize]

JMO, it is possible that Suzanne told one of the three family members she WAS going on bike ride. It is possible that neighbor was told to COUNT bikes, not specifically look for Suzannes bike. It is possible that BM got bike ride Info from another close family member and was relaying msg to neighbor.
JMO, if bike is red herring, it has served its purpose.
I am beginning to find the staging of the bike to be a poor coverup for spousal murder, lots of ways to poke holes in it!

So many possibilies. It would be possible that a family member received a text that SM was going for a bike ride. It is also possible that SM hasn't been in the habit of biking for a long time, and her family members would also know that. We don't know. Moo

 

[susiQ]

If we're discussing their marriage - perhaps SM was over the relationship.

Excellent point!

 

[Feistyomi]

Hi, Feistyomi; you know I enjoy reading your posts.

Are you saying that it's possible LE and the fbi came in and broke up that concrete based solely on the possibility that the homeowner called it in as in ---"BM came and did some work recently; you have my permission to do a thorough search including under the cement." ???

I am thinking there had to be more to it than that.
Hope that's clear.
My posts aren't always succinct.

Here's another thought..... years and years ago there was a movie called (I think) "Vanishing act", with Elliot Gould and Margot Kidder.
In it, the husband was so positive that his missing wife --who according to him was a terrible driver -- had possibly driven into a ravine.
He harped on the possibilities so much that he began to look suspicious.
Eventually she was found deceased and he was arrested for her murder.
It could be a similar pattern here.
Although more of a 'look over there' and not here.

And my .02 is that LE do not appear to be looking at an abductor nor an animal attack.
The waiting for updates is difficult.
Imo.

Thanks, I begin to learn all the ropes tying LE’s hands... SOP has so many legal restrictions. By the same token , even a totally innocent person, under legal advice would be reluctant to just give LE full access to everything...What a tangle!
I believe my husband and I would both pass muster, at this point, but the covid isolation has been interesting. Thanks again!

 

[Truecolors]

If we're discussing their marriage - perhaps SM was over the relationship.

That’s where my mind tends to go. Hope I’m wrong.