Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #24

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Admitting I'm not holding my breath here.

I'm enjoying the content, and especially the collaboration between PE and LS but I also understand PE announced monetization or "memberships" for their content this week.

It follows that this action would be followed-up by promoting a tune in for "first time discussed" program, now that they have our interest. MOO

ETA: To be clear, I don't mean to imply PE's content not reliable, and sorry if my post was unclear.

I just think the announcement follows a sound marketing plan for a channel with a "for-profit business plan."

Your post wasn't unclear at all, IMHO. I will also be surprised if anything earth-shattering is released, but I do enjoy their content. Their marketing plan appears to be sound, and they've scored a tactical victory by getting LS to tag-team with them.
 
You ask if it was early in the search when BM had complaints about LE actions and that has to be YES, the very first night SM missing or May 10 when BM had complaints.

At what point were the road, bike trail, and ravine considered a potential crime scene? Since CCSO has maintained SM is a missing persons case and has never acknowledged that foul play is being considered in her disappearance, I don't know that one could classify the trail or ravine a crime scene.

MSN provides us the following timeline for BM's comments:

1) SM's bike was located on the same date she was reported missing or May 10 according to BM's nephew TN. I estimate the hour the bike located would have to be between the phone call by a neighbor, reportedly received by 911 dispatch around 5:47 pm, and midnight (i.e., same day).

2) BM is standing on the road with TD-- just above the ravine where the bike was allegedly recovered when he claimed evidence destroyed when the bike was mishandled (touched by 10 people). At the same time, BM states potential footprints were destroyed when authorities allowed the searchers/investigators to park their vehicles along the side of the road closest to the ravine. Again, he's talking about the first night.

BM's interview with TD corroborates it was on the first night (May 10). I don't know how this date can be anything other than the search and rescue period or Day 1 of the missing person investigation. MOO

I really don't think he was physically there when the bike was discovered. I can almost hear him though, barking orders over the phone, that's he's on his way, expecting everything and everyone to stop and desist. May have been his second mistake of the day.
 
Does he?
Please explain how/why BM has legit concerns about the way the first responders on scene, handled the evidence.
If we've all missed something, please share it.

@OldCop is correct. The first responders may have been acting in a search-and-rescue capacity, where time was of the essence; they very well may not have been preserving evidence in a way necessary for a criminal investigation. It's not unreasonable to believe that first responders may have handled evidence in their attempts to find Suzanne without noting who touched the evidence, where it was found, or when it was located.

This is not an insult to the first responders, who were doing their jobs as they've been instructed. At the WTC site on 9/11, crews were focused on finding survivors, not cataloguing evidence.

While Barry Morphew's concerns seem misplaced -- first responders were just doing their jobs, after all -- from his point of view it would seem that the first responders damaged evidence that could lead to Suzanne.
 
I think every last second and every single word was very carefully chosen.
The entire video, to me, reeks of a planned response.
He said everything he thought he was expected to say.
And nothing else.
Which to me is just as important.
I mean, if I were to issue a public plea to my spouse's alleged abductors, it would be super emotional and ten times longer than 26 flippin' seconds.
There'd be no creative content editing, it'd be a raw, snot-faced, crying, LET MY SPOUSE GO, kind of plea.

jmo
Yes @Ontario Mom, it is a clear planned response. So much so, there was no one needed to ask him questions...
 
So still no Suzanne ? This leads me to believe she has been taken very far away or buried never to be found it worse with all that equipment available
On my way home today I saw a wood chipper devour a tree ...
JMO
 
The Profiling Evil guys are on now.

The PE guys have spoken to Suzanne's family!
SM's family reached out to the PE guys after listening to their channel.
Info they're sharing they got "directly from the family."

"We have been asked to share it with the world, and that's why we're here tonight."
Wow.

Saturday afternoon, May 9th, she was in communication with one of her closest friends. They were discussing an upcoming wedding/texting back and forth until mid-evening, and then all of a sudden, it came to an abrupt stop.

That friend has not heard from her since then.

"Barry's story the day she disappears starts at 5:00 that morning."
Barry told the family that he was the last person to see her alive and that he left her sleeping at 5:00 that morning, according to what family members told PE.

JMO.
 
Last edited:
The Profiling Evil guys are on now.

The PE guys have spoken to Suzanne's family!
SM's family reached out to the PE guys after listening to their channel.
Info they're sharing they got "directly from the family."

JMO.
First person witness information -- confirming SM was last in communication on Saturday afternoon May 9 until mid evening, when the text communication went silent. (Between SM and an unidentified personal friend).
 
So it sounds like whatever happened, happened on the evening of May 9th.

I think that text message conversation between Suzanne and her friend was real, and not BM pretending to be Suzanne.

That’s a discussion he couldn’t pull off, nor is it one that he’s suddenly stop responding to.

That’s not a hell of a lot of time to take care of business, which also may explain why this was apparently so sloppy (LE seemingly being on to him right away).

I wonder if there was an “emotional conversation,” before BM left in those early morning hours.
 
The PE guys are identifying red flags in the case.

Chris just mentioned the "let me tell you what happened" line from the TD video.

That's a red flag to them, just like it is to many of us.

They've also identified BM's statement that "We think this is where she was abducted" as a red flag.
"Who's we?" the PE guy asked.

JMO.
 
Last edited:
So it sounds like whatever happened, happened on the evening of May 9th.

I think that text message conversation between Suzanne and her friend was real, and not BM pretending to be Suzanne.

That’s a discussion he couldn’t pull off, nor is it one that he’s suddenly stop responding to.

That’s not a hell of a lot of time to take care of business, which also may explain why this was apparently so sloppy (LE seemingly being on to him right away).

I wonder if there was an “emotional conversation,” before BM left in those early morning hours.
Likely the conversation was real, unless he’s really good with wedding plan discussions. I will leave that exercise to the reader. MOO.
 
The PE guys are questioning whether or not there may be someone else who knows something about what's happened to SM or is involved in what's happened, based on the number of times BM said, "we" and "us" in the TD video.

JMO.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
120
Guests online
2,442
Total visitors
2,562

Forum statistics

Threads
602,236
Messages
18,137,306
Members
231,279
Latest member
skoorboh54
Back
Top