Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #16

[gitana1]

I wrote up a more thorough take on this and deleted it earlier. I'll try to make a point with what I was proposing before I hit delete and hope it comes out right.

There are generally four outcomes of a polygraph (per question of course):
1. Respondent innocent, deception (-)
2. Respondent innocent, deception (+)
3. Respondent guilty, deception (-)
4. Respondent guilty, deception (+)

No. 1 is the outcome wanted by law enforcement and suspect. No. 4 is only wanted by law enforcement. The other two are false positives and are totally worthless. Law enforcement also know that they are unreliable, and thus discount positives where outcome No. 1 above occur. As well as No.4. Polygraph misleads law enforcement as often as it helps, and LE can do better than what it offers. They are smart cookies, and have a ton of reliable tools better suited for investigation, and work on 100% fact.

Are you willing to clear a person, or is the bar low enough for arrest and prosecution, to rely on something that "70% of the time, works every time?" It isn't reliable for either, rather any, of its outcomes.

Well as we all know, polygraphs can’t be used in court as evidence that someone committed a crime, when they’re being tried for that crime, no arrest is going to take place on the basis of polygraph results.

It’s an interrogation tool. That’s it.

And my spouse goes missing? You better believe I’m sitting right down and letting them strap me in and interrogate the hell out of me.

 

[AugustWest]

My personal belief is that polygraphs are pretty much only used for interrogation purposes. They don’t even have to tell you the truth about your results and I don’t think LE are as interested in the results as they are using it as an interrogation tool.
I would take one in a heartbeat if my child or spouse went missing. I would submit DNA, fingerprints—anything at all to get moving on to finding my loved one. Because who cares?!—my child/spouse is MISSING. No one is going to get convicted on a failed polygraph.

Do you know, in this instance, whether Mr. Morphew did not submit DNA? Fingerprints? Heck, did he take a poly?

<modsnip>

ETA: I said my piece on polygraphs, and stand behind it. They are junk, and we would be better off without them.

 

[marylamby]

I wrote up a more thorough take on this and deleted it earlier. I'll try to make a point with what I was proposing before I hit delete and hope it comes out right.

There are generally four outcomes of a polygraph (per question of course):
1. Respondent innocent, deception (-)
2. Respondent innocent, deception (+)
3. Respondent guilty, deception (-)
4. Respondent guilty, deception (+)

No. 1 is the outcome wanted by law enforcement and suspect. No. 4 is only wanted by law enforcement. The other two are false positives and are totally worthless. Law enforcement also know that they are unreliable, and thus discount positives where outcome No. 1 above occur. As well as No.4. Polygraph misleads law enforcement as often as it helps, and LE can do better than what it offers. They are smart cookies, and have a ton of reliable tools better suited for investigation, and work on 100% fact.

Are you willing to clear a person, or is the bar low enough for arrest and prosecution, to rely on something that "70% of the time, works every time?" It isn't reliable for either, rather any, of its outcomes.

I've been watching the polygraph discussion and it's very interesting. From what I've 'heard' from other sources, there's a degree of innocence or guilt on a numerical scale.
I would assume, but that and $5 will get you a Starbucks coffee, that if you pass with flying colors or, in contrast, fail terribly wouldn't that color LE's focus?

I've taken 2 polygraphs, well, in separate years. The first one, I was 22yo and a very animated, enthusiastic young woman (I can't stop giggling). I couldn't quite seem to get the concept of 'yes' or 'no' down.
It was for a job and the questions targeted drug use and theft, amongst other things.
I had the very seasoned (ex-FBI) polygraph examiner in stitches.
He didn't leave the room and give results to my employer, instead he said, "let's try this again, shall we?" with further instructions and we repeated it. I still laughed a couple of times but we got through it. I got the position.

The second polygraph I had, I managed to control myself. Got that job too.
What I'm saying is, as a highly excitable, honest person, I can understand being shocked by some questions.
Alternately, someone who is calculating and likely to have a personality disorder (narcissism, sociopathy etc) might pass the test by a hair, especially knowing what will be asked.

 

[gitana1]

My personal belief is that polygraphs are pretty much only used for interrogation purposes. They don’t even have to tell you the truth about your results and I don’t think LE are as interested in the results as they are using it as an interrogation tool.
I would take one in a heartbeat if my child or spouse went missing. I would submit DNA, fingerprints—anything at all to get moving on to finding my loved one. Because who cares?!—my child/spouse is MISSING. No one is going to get convicted on a failed polygraph.

Exactly. And no one is going to get arrested on one either.

 

[happyday]

The following is MOO.

I think BM wants the general public (us) to think that LE has told him to stay quiet. Whether or not LE has actually requested that is unknown.

If my spouse went missing, I would be Total Opera Diva and I would be in LE's back pocket. If they told me to simmer down, I'd appoint a spokesperson to keep the word out. I would be terribly uncomfortable soliciting money to find my missing spouse yet not accounting for everything that the donations were used for, i.e., "Thanks to the generous donation of Mr XYZ we were able to do a drone search on..."

I think it's entirely possible that the video with TD was not completely spontaneous. Too many curious coincidences that easy to figure out with a little social media sleuthing.

I think SM's family may be silent because of concern for the daughters. I also think it's possible SM's family has a pretty good idea of what happened. Maybe not the details,but the end result. Some of this may not be mysterious to them, at all.

MOO

BBM

This is the only way to makes sense of it IMO.

 

[Synergizer Bunny]

The @******** page for #MissingPerson #suzannemorphew has given an update: "The extended Morphew Family would like to offer our most sincere and heartfelt gratitude to everyone who has contributed to our efforts in #FindingSuzanne ..."
https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1273721580003024896?s=21

What might those efforts include? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller...

 

[Tate123]

I don't think he is threatening or non-affable, but if you think he ran into Mr. Morphew in Maysville Freaking Colorado, pop. 400 and a dog, just out of the blue, I got some ocean front property here in Oklahoma to sell ya, real cheap.

Full water view or partial?
TD does this all the time. He has many videos where he just walks up, camera in hand. Look at the Vallow case. IMO

 

[happyday]

Do you know, in this instance, whether Mr. Morphew did not submit DNA? Fingerprints? Heck, did he take a poly?

Don't confuse what I am talking about with what people assume.

ETA: I said my piece on polygraphs, and stand behind it. They are junk, and we would be better off without them.

No, I don’t think we know any of that. I agree, they are junk, but I was just saying I would submit to any interrogation, even a polygraph, if my husband was missing and I didn’t do it.

 

[Synergizer Bunny]

The following is MOO.

I think BM wants the general public (us) to think that LE has told him to stay quiet...If my spouse went missing, I would be Total Opera Diva and I would be in LE's back pocket. If they told me to simmer down, I'd appoint a spokesperson to keep the word out.

Perhaps, police said to BM, "If you are involved, it would be in your best interest not to say anything to the public." If so, BM is taking their advice.

If I were involved in my husband's disappearance, I would be reacting just like BM and hoping that this would soon become a cold case, especially, if a body was not found.

If I were innocent, I would react just like you. I would be desperate to keep my husband's face in the media and be talking to detectives on a regular basis. I would conduct my own search parties and hire a PI to try to find him or what happened to him.

I would not be able to rest until I found him, one way or the other.

I would not set up a crowd gathering fund or accept one being set up for me. I'd be using my own savings. What good is money unless you are enjoying it with your life partner.

 

[GordianKnot]

What might those efforts include? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller...

BBM:

To be fair, the man did make a 26-second video.

Not to mention, he and his buddies covered a 200 mile search radius.

Really thoroughly, too!

JMO.

 

[10ofRods]

Do you know, in this instance, whether Mr. Morphew did not submit DNA? Fingerprints? Heck, did he take a poly?

Don't confuse what I am talking about with what people assume.

ETA: I said my piece on polygraphs, and stand behind it. They are junk, and we would be better off without them.

We do not know, but since even John and Patsy Ramsey did fingerprints and swabs, I would suspect BM did as well. If he refused then that's added to the pile of suspicions.

 

[marylamby]

"'Perhaps, police said to BM, "If you are involved, it would be in your best interest not to say anything to the public." If so, BM is taking their advice."'

If I were involved in my husband's disappearance, I would be reacting just like BM and hoping that this would soon become a cold case, especially, if a body was not found.

If I were innocent, I would react just like you. I would be desperate to keep my husband's face in the media and be talking to detectives on a regular basis. I would conduct my own search parties and hire a PI to try to find him or what happened to him.

I would not be able to rest until I found him, one way or the other.

I would not set up a public fund or accept one being set up for me. I'd be using my own savings. What good is money unless you are enjoying it with your life partner.

Perhaps, police said to BM, "If you are involved, it would be in your best interest not to say anything to the public." If so, BM is taking their advice.

I don't think LE says that often. Please, experts, correct me if I'm mistaken!

 

[Seattle1]

My personal belief is that polygraphs are pretty much only used for interrogation purposes. They don’t even have to tell you the truth about your results and I don’t think LE are as interested in the results as they are using it as an interrogation tool.
I would take one in a heartbeat if my child or spouse went missing. I would submit DNA, fingerprints—anything at all to get moving on to finding my loved one. Because who cares?!—my child/spouse is MISSING. No one is going to get convicted on a failed polygraph.

Hear, hear! And thanks for saying what I could not type fast enough.

 

[gitana1]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

Using polygraphs to determine someone’s guilt or innocence? That’s not how LE uses them.

This conversation started in relation to the possible implications of taking or refusing to take a polygraph test when someone you love goes missing. What does it say about the person who takes it or does not?

Your advice was to never take them because they’re unreliable. And you asked whether the bar was low enough to arrest someone based on polygraph results. Of course not. And that never happens.

Polygraphs are an interrogation tool. Half the time LE probably doesn’t even care much about the accuracy. They know that they can ask a bunch of detailed questions under a high pressure situation. It’s valuable to them.

And so it would be valuable to me, as the loved one of a missing person. Or someone who had been killed.

Take my blood. Take my fingerprints. Take my dental impressions. Take my phone. My computer. Strap me up to whatever machine you think will help you eliminate me as a suspect.

It’s human nature.

Now maybe if LE had done nothing but look at me for a year and started talking about a grand jury or arrest? Then I might stop talking. Lawyer up. Because at that point I might begin to think my cooperation hasn’t helped and they’re not doing their jobs correctly. And the shock has faded. The desperation is no longer new.

 

[Cassady]

That is correct. Except for threatening the person being questioned (or his family) with harm, investigators are allowed wide latitude during interrogation in terms of telling a person that they posses evidence or that a co-conspirator has turned against him. That's why -- & I was deputy prosecutor for about 7 years & have now been a defense attorney for 9 years -- it's imperative to ask for counsel if authorities are questioning you.

You would agree that there is a big difference between LE lying to a suspect and LE lying to the general public or making misleading statements to the press?

I think LE goes out of their way to make sure statements to the public are accurate and thus some of the weird verbage you see in press releases or statements...IMO.

 

[susiQ]

BBM:

I agree.

This may be one of the few scenes surrounding SM's disappearance that wasn't staged.

I don't think BM planned to encounter TD that day.

I do think it ended up being a case of mutual usury.

TD got his big scoop, and BM got a chance to recount his version of events to a member of the public.

While both parties apparently saw and seized upon an opportunity to use the other, I'm not sure it ended up benefiting both of them.

In fact, I see that interview as being highly disadvantageous to one of them.

JMO.

LOL!! “Mutual usury!” So appropriate.
And yes, definitely benefited one and NOT the other

 

[JosieMae]

Yes. The prime suspect talking to the media is pure gold. Look no further than Letecia Stauch and Chris Watts.

If he’s not talking, it’s because he doesn’t want to. Sickening really.

A glaring example of this is Jeffrey McDonald's interview on the Dick Cavett show. That ill-conceived appearance led to a chain of events I'm sure he bitterly regrets now.

 

[Stripehaven]

It is so bizarre. So bizarre. The words "extended family" jumped straight out at me. Since TN is supposedly skilled in publicity, what could he possibly mean by using "extended"? Why not "the whole family" or "Suzanne's family and friends"? Usually when we use the words "extended family" we are referring to family members who are not in the immediate core of the family -- the great aunts, the cousins, nieces and nephews, etc. What could possibly be the purpose of using that phrase in this crafted update? It sounds like TN is leaving out BM and the daughters! What the heck? Is this just an inadvertent mistake? Am I reading too much into this?

I assumed he was simply including himself and any other concerned family members beyond BM and daughters. It doesn’t seem weird to me.

 

[marylamby]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Using polygraphs to determine someone’s guilt or innocence? That’s not how LE uses them.

This conversation started in relation to the possible implications of taking or refusing to take a polygraph test when someone you love goes missing. What does it say about the person who takes it or does not?

Your advice was to never take them because they’re unreliable. And you asked whether the bar was low enough to arrest someone based on polygraph results. Of course not. And that never happens.

Polygraphs are an interrogation tool. Half the time LE probably doesn’t even care much about the accuracy. They know that they can ask a bunch of detailed questions under a high pressure situation. It’s valuable to them.

And so it would be valuable to me, as the loved one of a missing person. Or someone who had been killed.

Take my blood. Take my fingerprints. Take my dental impressions. Take my phone. My computer. Strap me up to whatever machine you think will help you eliminate me as a suspect.

It’s human nature.

Now maybe if LE had done nothing but look at me for a year and started talking about a grand jury or arrest? Then I might stop talking. Lawyer up. Because at that point I might begin to think my cooperation hasn’t helped and they’re not doing their jobs correctly. And the shock has faded. The desperation is no longer new.

What you said! Just to be clear, even though I may be 'excitable', if someone I loved (or even knew, for that matter) was missing or even murdered, I'd take the polygraph in a heartbeat, even if it was racing.
Same for any and all other cooperation. As you said, you can worry about that later.
Having truth on your side and wanting to find your loved one surpasses your own self-preservation.

 

[TxGidget]

I don’t think he knew what he was getting into. He went into thinking yeah! I can help! And then... things took a turn. First couple of days, he tried to get LE and the press to focus on what/who he thought might be the culprit, and then.... Next, he tried to get his relative to make a video plea-and then... Next, he tried to get some funds together (at whose behest?) so they could mount the best search, and then.... Next someone may have asked him to stop talking. And here we are.

ITA !