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

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dave F. said:
No. In the ID video, as the neighbor's complaint is referenced at 1:57/2:56, night video is shown of what is clearly a Caterpillar 777 mining truck. The 750 hp engine of those babies can make a helluva racket, especially at 11:30 pm or 3:00 am on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday night; and I sure wouldn't want to take any chance on those 11 foot diameter tires running over my manicured lawn. My theory is that the operator realized he/she might be in the wrong place at the wrong time, not to mention the fact that the 777 has no headlights or taillights, so said driver pulled out and vamoosed before he/she got a ticket. That's my theory, based on the well researched ID presentation, and I'm sticking to it (for now). IMO
https://twitter.com/discoveryid?lang=en
Click to expand...

I thought the ID video was lazy in posting that mining vehicle. Essentially, someone pulled a stock image of what they thought construction equipment would look like.

I don't recall ever seeing such a large piece of equipment being used on a single residential property. Nor would it make sense for someone with a landscaping business to have a piece of machinery that large.
 
Dave F. said:
No. In the ID video, as the neighbor's complaint is referenced at 1:57/2:56, night video is shown of what is clearly a Caterpillar 777 mining truck. The 750 hp engine of those babies can make a helluva racket, especially at 11:30 pm or 3:00 am on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday night; and I sure wouldn't want to take any chance on those 11 foot diameter tires running over my manicured lawn. My theory is that the operator realized he/she might be in the wrong place at the wrong time, not to mention the fact that the 777 has no headlights or taillights, so said driver pulled out and vamoosed before he/she got a ticket. That's my theory, based on the well researched ID presentation, and I'm sticking to it (for now). IMO
https://twitter.com/discoveryid?lang=en
Click to expand...
Was that the only construction vehicle on site at that time? (I'm impressed with your gathering together of disparate bits of information). It's certainly not an insignificant construction vehicle! Thank you for your research.
I can't think of a plausible explanation for heavy construction machinery being operated in the early hours of the morning, without the express permission of the land/building site owner. To access the site without that permission is trepass. I've renovated 12 properties (for me to live in) and had one new build from scratch and in every contract I've had with builders there has been a regular clause stipulating what constitutes "normal working hours". Any exceptions had to first be negotiated with and agreed by me. That's standard contracting. The early hours of the morning - when bordering neighbors would likely be disturbed - wouldn't cut it at any time. If there was an emergency exception requiring extraordinary planned works (e.g. accidental electricity cut due to severed cables) neighbors are usually alerted in advance, if at all possible.
In my opinion, this isn't someone who innocently went there and then thought better of it. My first thoughts would focus on some kind of suspicious activity - either to do with someone not working associated with the site trying to steal equipment, or something else equally suspicious.
It is not only disruptive and disturbing for neighbors to have noisy/heavy construction machinery being worked in the early hours of the morning; it is also trespassing on someone else's property, which is illegal.
 
Dave F. said:
No. In the ID video, as the neighbor's complaint is referenced at 1:57/2:56, night video is shown of what is clearly a Caterpillar 777 mining truck. The 750 hp engine of those babies can make a helluva racket, especially at 11:30 pm or 3:00 am on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday night; and I sure wouldn't want to take any chance on those 11 foot diameter tires running over my manicured lawn. My theory is that the operator realized he/she might be in the wrong place at the wrong time, not to mention the fact that the 777 has no headlights or taillights, so said driver pulled out and vamoosed before he/she got a ticket. That's my theory, based on the well researched ID presentation, and I'm sticking to it (for now). IMO
https://twitter.com/discoveryid?lang=en
Click to expand...

I don't really trust the ID video. So many stuff in there are still not clear. We really don't know what equipment was used on the site that specific night. Jmo
 
Last edited:
Goldenseal said:
IIRC, Frazee said something like "people disappear every day!!" in response to the large search/LE effort. He couldn't believe that anyone was putting much effort into a search. Idiot.
Click to expand...

JMO, if course.
What kind of person thinks like that?!
I think that same arrogant attitude is at play here as well, Oviedo. I think that BM thought that he staged and planned this crime so cleverly, expecting to be welcomed home Mother's Day with sympathy. Instead he was welcomed home with questions that he didn't want to answer. It threw him for a loop.

I also think he expected sympathy when he said, "too soon." Like, poor, poor Barry, he is just beside himself, he can't bear to speak about it. Someone may have had that response, but doubt LE did.

I think he thought he could sell a kidnapping scenerio with his 26 second video. Assuming that he disappeared Suzanne, and I do, that's a very arrogant thing to do.

Then there's his 'let me tell you what happened,' and telling TD that he has been cleared. Pfftttt. He's a salesman alright. A wheeler dealer. It seems like he is used to getting his way too. Hopefully not this time.
Moo
 
kay74 said:
<modsnip: quoted post was removed> I'm all for LE. I am just worried they went to focusing only on Barry in the beginning and not enough on campsites, others (drifters) and whoever else was around there. I still say this was definitely an abduction! MOO
Click to expand...

Law enforcement often does not show their cards
What we see and hear is not an indication of what they are doing or know

I haven't discounted anything for that reason and I think your thoughts and opinions are ok to have, as are others

We just don't know

Edited to add:
I also like to hear all the opinions, no matter the subject, but I will admit I always like mine best
 
Last edited by a moderator:
EggSalad said:
I think this is a fascinating topic. MOO, but if it was indeed BM causing the noise, it seems like three possible scenarios:


-That little bit of work was supposed to completed earlier in the day on Saturday but wasn’t. BM was not onsite Saturday to compete the work so In order to keep the project on time, he had to complete it Saturday night since he was going to Denver on Sunday.

-That work was going to be completed on Sunday but BM had an urgent change of plans and had to be in Denver Sunday and in order to keep the project on track, the work was completed Saturday night.

-No work was completed but machinery at the site needed to be moved or taken to a new site.

No matter which scenario, 11:30pm on Saturday is a very unnatural time.

I’d really to curious to learn about the alleged takeout food order as that day and time stamp of a known ‘last seen’ would put an interesting spin on the Saturday night alleged activity.
Click to expand...
Good Post. Whatever the reason for the noise, someone was willing to disrupt the neighbors at that late hour and call a lot of attention to himself/herself.
 
Ontario Mom said:
I think you're spot on here.
AFAIK, his nephew TN was not on site when the bike was recovered, and BM allegedly saw/heard it'd been handled by multiple people.
It was BM himself, that allegedly saw the damaged bike, with the tire this way or that, so clearly it was BM himself was the source of TN's information on it.

jmo
Click to expand...
I have a sincere question for LE in this group. If you come upon an article that could pertain to a crime scene or a missing person would you take a photo and show it/text it to a family member to identify? Not a vehicle with a license plate, but something more generic like a bike, backpack, coat, skateboard.... This would be a way that many people could have seen the exact condition and position of the bike.
 
kay74 said:
<modsnip: quoted post was removed> I'm all for LE. I am just worried they went to focusing only on Barry in the beginning and not enough on campsites, others (drifters) and whoever else was around there. I still say this was definitely an abduction! MOO
Click to expand...
MOO LE is going to follow the path of where the evidence leads. We aren’t aware of very much evidence at this point. It will all be exposed in time and LE holds the cards on that. There have been 600+ tips called in iirc, LE checks out all the tips for credible clues.
If LE focused quickly on one person, it could be bc there’s no credible proof SM ever left the home on MD. I heard the two retired police on Profiling Evil say “You can’t leave the house until you know she left the house.” Video link included. 43:00 minute mark, listen closely.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

I have been called a "defender" of Barry Morphew, but I'm not enamored of the guy. I don't know him personally.

That being said, I am bewildered by the fact that so many people suspect him -- and use investigators' actions with respect to him as justification for doing so -- while at the same time seemingly ignore investigators' warning that nobody has been ruled in or out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LietKynes said:
Wow.
I have to wonder when BM will have Suzanne declared deceased ?
We might not have to wait very long, sadly.
Imo.
Click to expand...
Fireflize said:
Hmm. Financially, he may feel he has no choice but to do that asap. He may have no qualms about appearances. Moo moo
Click to expand...
SSA - POMS: GN 00304.050 - Presumption of Death of a Missing Person - 01/05/2012
however, we know Michael Chambers was declared deceased fairly quick - TX - TX - Michael Chambers, 70, Hunt County, 10 March 2017 #8

so it appears this can be done earlier than 7 years - I seem to recall we had lengthy discussions on this previously a few threads ago
JMO
 
TxGidget said:
Good Post. Whatever the reason for the noise, someone was willing to disrupt the neighbors at that late hour and call a lot of attention to himself/herself.
Click to expand...

I agree.

JMO
The one thing that has been bothering me about how LE did the searching of that job site was it was pretty limited to a certain area. Is there a chance the searching was not done in the right spot the perp used?

My concern is maybe someone attempted to burn her body somewhere else and realized they could not get everything reduced to ash so they may have brought the remaining remains to mix in with the dirt being used to spread underneath the cement pour.

What we witnessed during the search from live video news shots and also post search news coverage is the area that was searched on the slab itself was limited to just a certain area.

LE first cut the slab into small rectangles or squares to remove the concrete and then dug into the dirt below the slab. This was only done for a relatively small area of the slab.

So my concern is maybe they were in the wrong place and some of her remains could still be there?

From working some construction many years ago I do know that when concrete is freshly poured and sets up, you can usually tell just by looking at it which part of the concrete is still "green" and which part was poured a long time ago. The "green" concrete will usually be darker in color because it still has moisture in the hardened cement. Over time the cement will turn a lighter color as all the moisture evaporates away and the concrete gets older.

So maybe LE could tell which parts had to be the more fresh concrete from a recent pour. I hope that was the case because I still worry they may have been in the wrong spot.

I would have been inclined to go ahead and rip up the entire slab for any spot that had the slightest chance of being newer concrete.
 
MassGuy said:
I think he would have spoken to the press if everything went as planned. I think he was flustered, because law enforcement didn’t buy what he was selling. Hence the “too soon.”

He couldn’t then go out and make an appeal, as that would be both embarrassing and incriminating. He needed to convince both law enforcement and the public, but he couldn’t exactly stand next to a sheriff (like we’ve seen in countless other cases), and tell a lie that had already been shot down.

The press would have eaten him alive, so he bypassed all of that with his video appeal.

What’s your interpretation?
Click to expand...

The only narrative which in my mind fits a "too soon" scenario is one in which this was a voluntary disappearance. "It's only been a few days, we had a fight, she might have gone somewhere to cool off, it's too soon to panic, and so forth." The others he's been pushing? Not so much.

Had a bike accident and is lying in a ditch or ravine somewhere, injured? Time is of the essence. Not too soon.

Attacked by a mountain lion and dragged off somewhere, possibly with less than fatal injuries? Still could be saved. Not too soon.

Sideswiped by a car into a ravine, creek, or side of the road? You're just going to leave her there? Not too soon.

Abducted by a bushy-haired stranger, who is taking Suzanne further and further away by the minute? Definitely not too soon.

Not to mention in his definitely NOT "Too Soon" 27-second plea he did not provide any helpful information whatsoever that might help the general public find Suzanne or be on the lookout for her, including, but not limited to:
1. The road on which she was biking
2. A description of her bicycle
3. A description of what she might have been wearing
4. A description of the color of her helmet (I realize that was on the flyer but it could have been stated explicitly)
5. What time they suspect she went for a bike ride or usually went
6. Her favorite bike riding routes
7. Exactly where her bike was found

(I realize that at least some of these can be found out by searching MSM but in a REAL missing persons case they cannot be repeated enough!) So yeah. Short answer, I agree. He was caught off guard, and the only thing that popped into his head was Too Soon. And the video was far Too Little, Too Late.
 
Madeleine74 said:
This an interesting subject (at least to me). I've been thinking about how each of the missing people, often mentioned in discussions of the SM case, were actually found (or not found) and through what means. Did media coverage, National and International, crack the cases? Did volunteers conducting searches find the victims? (If I were in grad school I'd probably make this one of my research projects.)

Gannon Stauch: Investigators tracked the stepmother, LS, through her digital footprint and surveillance. Gannon's body was found by a road crew working near where she had put his body, in a suitcase or duffel type bag.

Kelsey Berreth: remains never found though site of body burn and where body was kept in barn were disclosed by KK. Investigators had a bloody crime scene, and digital footprints from KB's phone. It was various digital evidence (phone records, neighbor's security cam footage, other vidcam footage showing PF and KK) that uncovered KK and exposed some of the day's activities.

Jennifer Dulos: remains never found. Investigators used cell phone & cell tower & GPS records & obtained security cam recordings showing Fotus Dulos & mistress discarding bags in various dumpsters to find the bloody evidence and be able to arrest him.

Holly Bobo: remains found years after she was kidnapped, by a random guy looking for ginseng, who came across her skeletal remains out in the wooded area she was dumped. It took years to solve and there was conflict between local LE and TN FBI resources.

Laci Peterson: was found 4 months after she was killed when her remains and those of her unborn son washed up on the rocks on the east side of the SF Bay, 90 mi from her home. Scott Peterson had placed himself at the SF Bay on the day she went missing. There was no forensic evidence of a crime in their home.

IMO
Click to expand...
RSBM

Fascinating post, you can see the tide turning. If the electronic/digital footprint of today had existed in 2002, Scott would have been in jail within a week, talk about not too bright. After police arrived at the Peterson home, one detective found a phone book on a kitchen counter, opened to a full-page ad for a defense lawyer. (Needless to say, that nugget, would have turned up with a search on his phone) Laci apparently didn't have a cell phone, they mention finding her purse with sunglasses, keys and wallet. 1996 car no GPS. No ring doorbell CCTV in the neighborhood to speak of.

As to this case...we've heard nothing about whether Suzanne carried a cell phone or if one was left behind or is it missing entirely (?) Have to believe she owned a cell phone, that at a minimum would give her timeline. Nothing about a ring type device in the home. It seems really strange to leave your family so vulnerable, living in such an isolated area and having no alarms/security and or cameras. Have to believe something existed.

Without getting into all the other potential sources of a digital footprint e.g. GPS in vehicles, ADT, Apple watch, apple Ear Buds, potential GPS device on her Bike, Barry's cell....just the two above could be essential to solving this case.
 
Last edited:
Warwick7 said:
If it was an abduction why didn't LE issue a warning?
They never issued a warning to the public.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that LE not making a statement to support the possibility of SM being abducted is remarkable. The police would have a duty to share relevant information if they believed that the general public was being put at risk by the abductor/s remaining at large.

Furthermore, the "appeal video" released by BM, offering the abductor/s a reward for SM's safe return ('no questions asked'), was not made/released in consultation or collaboration with LE. It was of his own volition and recorded by a relative, in discrete segments.
Why would anyone want to unilaterally produce an appeal without having the expertise and support of LE?
In my opinion, there's no justifiable answer to that question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 53 more.
Total: 3,427 (members: 54, guests: 3,373)

Online statistics

Members online
54
Guests online
3,373
Total visitors
3,427
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,661
Messages
18,175,022
Members
232,783
Latest member
Abk018
Back
Top