Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #22

[MassGuy]

I think it’s time we hear an update from the Chaffee County Sheriffs Office again - even if the message is exactly the same as the last time, July 9.

Their last press release was at the 2 month mark, so I think it’s possible we’ll see another one in a couple weeks.

I wouldn’t hold your breath in regards to an actual press conference though. I don’t anticipate one until there is a major development.

 

[Quiet Time]

AFAIK...most mountain bikes are quite lightweight- while mountain biking one must ascend the trails and mountains to be able to gain the ultimate thrill of the descent.

Mountain bikes are usually made out of lightweight materials to make the ascent a bit more manageable for the rider...that climb is hard enough- imagine adding to it a heavy bike! They engineered around this many years ago...MOO

Titanium?
A lot of wheelchairs are made of titanium, because of the it being so light weight. Just sayin'

ETA: ok forget what i said..JnRyan is saying they're kind of heavy.

 

[JnRyan]

Also, what exactly do we know about the RV park that is very close to the M home? There absolutely had to be people staying/living there daily, weekly monthly- who knows- those places are well, transient- and that is their intent and purpose.

It’s not like when Covid occurred they could come in and extract people from there- so what about the “residents” and visitors there? Are we aware of any searches that took place there? Canvassing?

Seems like that would have been a ripe place to examine- did I miss this piece? Is it one of the places that was searched in the 10 searches we’ve heard about possibly?

Too.Many.Questions. Hello Answers....????

Edited by me- to remove (my!) inaccurate information that I do not want circulating-

Good point. I forgot about the RV park.

 

[lamlawindy]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

It’s not easy to get multiple search warrants at the same house, or be granted permission to dig up someone’s property.

Unless the FBI and CBI forgot how to handle a potential abduction, it’s apparent to me they knew that’s not what they were dealing with.

In the same breath, it’s also pretty obvious to me they knew exactly what they were dealing with.

Very early on too.

In the Thomas case, we had some interesting developments in those early days, but the case couldn’t be more different.

We didn’t hear about multiple search warrants, and the possibility that Barb did succumb to misadventure, is at least theoretically possible.

Not that I believe that for a second.

There also doesn’t appear to have been (what is in reality) a multiple agency task force assigned to the investigation.

CO - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #8

I agree with @MassGuy that "it's pretty obvious" that Barry Morphew is being looked at by investigators: the multiple warrants -- though the probable cause affidavits (PCAs) have not been unsealed -- do provide a key insight into investigators' thoughts.

I believe that investigators think "they knew exactly what they were dealing with," possibly "[v]ery early on." The "problem" is that their rationale cannot be examined by the public because of the sealed PCAs.

From an attorney's perspective -- and from my perspective that's always wary of government -- I find the PCAs' continued sealing (sixty days or so from the warrants' issuance) to be disconcerting. I understand that such a procedure is custom for Colorado -- and maybe it works in Colorado's courts -- but I find a government's ability to shield warrants and PCAs from public view a full two months after the searches to be disturbing. I have no problem with warrants and PCAs being shielded to prevent destruction of evidence, but I have no idea what evidence would have to be protected sixty days after the warrants' issuance.

 

[Madeleine74]

I believe that investigators think "they knew exactly what they were dealing with," possibly "[v]ery early on." The "problem" is that their rationale cannot be examined by the public because of the sealed PCAs.

BBM

Question: When have investigators ever allowed the public to examine their case and determine what investigators should/should not be doing?

I've followed criminal cases since 1994 and I can't think of any case I've followed in which the public was privy to or LE shared the investigative details, beyond some cursory level, before a prelim. hearing or indictment. The public, by and large, isn't even aware of everyone LE is investigating, and until there's an arrest there's often no official statement.

IMO

 

[lamlawindy]

BBM

Question: When have investigators ever allowed the public to examine their case and determine what investigators should/should not be doing?

I've followed criminal cases since 1994 and I can't think of any case I've followed in which the public was privy to or LE shared the investigative details, beyond some cursory level, before a prelim. hearing or indictment. The public, by and large, isn't even aware of everyone LE is investigating, and until there's an arrest there's often no official statement.

IMO

My argument isn't that investigators have to share everything about an ongoing investigation. The gist of my post is that the PCAs and warrants remained sealed.

A search warrant -- and its PCA -- are not part of an investigation: it is a judicial document showing that a judicial officer has determined that probable cause exists for a search or arrest. Most judicial documents at the state level are public: we want people to be able to see that police and judicial decisions are being made on legitimate bases.

Now, there are certain limited exceptions for keeping warrants and PCAs to remain sealed. One may fear destruction of evidence or violence against peace officers: neither applies here, since the searches have already been conducted. Another concern may be that the contents may disclose trade secrets or divulge information about a minor: such concerns can be allayed with redaction.

In essence, the issue boils down to the old maxim: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guardians themselves?) Without the ability to see the reasons for a judicially-permitted search, then there is no way to check government overreach in the search & seizure arena.

 

[DizzyB]

It sounds like Lauren may be close to getting info from the restaurant that Suzanne may have picked up takeout from. Timeline will be interesting. The PE guys felt it was very significant that a second SW was obtained. They think it’s difficult to get that second bite at the apple. They feel probable cause to go back had to be compelling for a judge to grant that.

 

[Madeleine74]

The gist of my post is that the PCAs and warrants remained sealed.

A search warrant -- and its PCA -- are not part of an investigation: it is a judicial document showing that a judicial officer has determined that probable cause exists for a search or arrest.

Right. I'm kind of used to search warrants being sealed for a period of time, at least in the cases I've followed. I can't remember if I've ever seen a PCA released before an indictment.

 

[MassGuy]

Right. I'm kind of used to search warrants being sealed for a period of time, at least in the cases I've followed. I can't remember if I've ever seen a PCA released before an indictment.

Hell, it was a big enough pain in the *advertiser censored* to even get to see the arrest affidavits in recent Colorado cases (many weeks after arrest, and not before a prolonged court battle).

The search warrants come much later, and I’ve yet to see all of them released.

 

[lamlawindy]

Right. I'm kind of used to search warrants being sealed for a period of time, at least in the cases I've followed. I can't remember if I've ever seen a PCA released before an indictment.

That's the issue: Not all search warrants lead to evidence, much less the filing of charges. If -- for example -- the searches of the Morphew home produced no relevant evidence, then there's no need to keep the warrants and PCAs sealed. If the searches did produce usable evidence, then investigators presumably have the evidence in their possession now; again, there's no need to keep the warrants and PCAs sealed.

 

[Madeleine74]

That's the issue: Not all search warrants lead to evidence, much less the filing of charges. If -- for example -- the searches of the Morphew home produced no relevant evidence, then there's no need to keep the warrants and PCAs sealed. If the searches did produce usable evidence, then investigators presumably have the evidence in their possession now; again, there's no need to keep the warrants and PCAs sealed.

Doesn't keeping search warrants sealed also help protect the rights of any POI in addition to the state, making sure a case isn't "tried in the court of public opinion?"

Also, from an article:

Requests to seal records typically are made to protect an ongoing investigation, keeping private the identities of those being investigated and others who may be helping police in the investigation.

Prenda said when there's a pending investigation or suspects at large, that's a significant reason for the records to be sealed.​

 

[lamlawindy]

Hell, it was a big enough pain in the *advertiser censored* to even get to see the arrest affidavits in recent Colorado cases (many weeks after arrest, and not before a prolonged court battle).

The search warrants come much later, and I’ve yet to see all of them released.

Yes, I have no idea why Colorado does it that way. I'd hate it as a defense attorney, but -- fortunately -- I don't have to practice there.

 

[Seattle1]

The Chaffee County Sherriff's Office has never confirmed any information about SM's bike and has never verified that her bike was recovered.

We first learned that the bike was located on Sunday, the day SM disappeared, from BM's nephew TN during an audio-only interview with News4 Alan Gionet on May 14. [.54 mark @ video link below].

Just as I don't understand why the unsubstantiated rumor of BM attending fire-training on the day SM disappeared keeps resurfacing (i.e., in his own words, BM stated on video that he was on a landscape project), I feel the same way about the repeating story that SM's bike recovered leaning against a tagged tree in a ravine off the road.

Again, the only evidence of the alleged location of the bike when recovered was provided by BM. In the video with YT blogger Tyson, TD asked BM:

08:00 So they found her bike right against that tree down there?

BM replied:

08:04 Nah, it was on the ground

08:05 oh the wheel was facing and the uh

08:07 sheriff's department uh they screwed

08:10 everything up they shouldn't have

08:13 touched it

IMO, it doesn't follow that a crashed bike would be leaning against a tree (or a planted bike would be leaning against a tree).

I believe the bike was most likely located on the ground within a specified area tagged by LE at both the road level and the ravine level. I'm also confident the bike was duly photographed before it was removed and taken into evidence.

MOO

'We Want Her Back': $200,000 Reward Offered In Search For Suzanne Morphew

 

[lamlawindy]

Doesn't keeping search warrants sealed also help protect the rights of any POI in addition to the state, making sure a case isn't "tried in the court of public opinion?"

Possibly. That hasn't really happened in this case, though, as cited in the original post. Indeed, the lack of disclosure in this case possibly may impair Barry Morphew's rights: if nothing of interest was indeed found during the searches, a great cloud of suspicion might be lifted.

Your question is excellent, though: Where does the balance lie between protecting an accused's right to a fair trial versus the rights of citizens to oversee the actions of the police and judiciary? Colorado -- as is its right -- has answered it one way, but it's not the answer I'd give.

 

[Madeleine74]

Possibly. That hasn't really happened in this case, though, as cited in the original post. Indeed, the lack of disclosure in this case possibly may impair Barry Morphew's rights: if nothing of interest was indeed found during the searches, a great cloud of suspicion might be lifted.

BBM

I doubt, short of the Sheriff announcing BM is not a POI, that a cloud of suspicion would ever lift just from the release of a search warrant.

IMO

 

[Lilypad13]

From CM on the latest YT Profiling Evil:

Before you can leave the house, you have to eliminate the house.

A powerful statement, IMO

Yes that was powerful and really makes sense. I also thought it was interesting that both of the PE guys (Mike King & Chris McDonough) said it wasn’t easy to obtain a 2nd SW for the house without something very substantial to justify it to a Judge. He called it getting “another bite of the apple.”

 

[lamlawindy]

BBM

I doubt, short of the Sheriff announcing BM is not a POI, that a cloud of suspicion would ever lift just from the release of a search warrant. Not with social media, true crime boards, people injecting themselves into cases, the spread of gossip and rumors, and all of that. Those things (minus social media) existed before, but the speed of spread and the number of ways it spreads are an order of magnitude greater.

IMO

Maybe not completely, but my point is that clarity & disclosure build trust in the judicial system. Non-disclosure, save for a few limited exceptions, erodes that trust.

 

[PaulaDC]

Or doesn't report every single use. Could be a friend has a key and can use it whenever it's not rented. Just sayin'

Somebody was using it, but looks like nobody was booked as a renter.

ALL MY OWN SPECULATION

Could be the cleaning person wasn't actually working because she wasn't an essential worker. It may have been she that set the timing of the clean. moo

 

[Lilypad13]

It sounds like Lauren may be close to getting info from the restaurant that Suzanne may have picked up takeout from. Timeline will be interesting. The PE guys felt it was very significant that a second SW was obtained. They think it’s difficult to get that second bite at the apple. They feel probable cause to go back had to be compelling for a judge to grant that.

Oh sorry I said that too before I read this. I’m catching up...but anyway I agree that was very interesting and I’m dying to know what it was that led them back to the house and was important enough that a Judge signed off on a 2nd SW! What???!!!

 

[Charlot123]

I think law enforcement would have searched those homes, and we’d see behavior that indicated they were exploring the possibility of some sort of stranger abduction.

If they weren’t positive what occurred, I’d expect them to do the same things they did in the Watts and Berreth cases (official missing persons posters with detailed description, and a timeline of Suzanne’s last known movements).

All we’ve seen is an intense focus on the Morphew home, as well as that property BM worked on.

And silence, which I find to be incredibly encouraging.

Not necessarily stranger abduction, but maybe someone could be a witness, but is afraid of coming out because of COVID violations? If I remember correctly, the cleaning lady took out a lot of thrash? (I didn’t listen to it myself, someone here mentioned it).

It would be nice to have witnesses.