Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #25

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
What the anonymous family member said about the GPS data may be
true or false. Investigators have neither confirmed nor denied the truthfulness of the statement.

I don't think Lauren knows with certainty that the GPS data contradicts Barry Morphew's account: she'd have had to see the data herself & compare it to Barry's account to be certain. I do think that Lauren spoke with the anonymous family member and is faithfully reporting what the family member told her.

lazy journalism .... in the old days no one would publish anything without 2 confirmed sources.... now anonymous family member stating something to LS that LE would have never said based on how tight-lipped LE has been so far gets out there as a 'scoop'....smh
 
"If" he left on Sunday morning at 5 a.m., How is that justified by supposedly going to Denver to allegedly set things up for the crew on Monday? Did the text messages fall off suddenly on Saturday with the best friend? IMO something happened to her Saturday night, and that helps explain why he allegedly left at 5 a.m. There is "something" about that 5 a.m. hour. What is the proof he was there at all on Sunday morning? Either of them for that matter.

Perhaps 5am is the time Suzanne was left in her final resting place.
 
lazy journalism .... in the old days no one would publish anything without 2 confirmed sources.... now anonymous family member stating something that LE would have never said based on how tight-lipped LE has been so far gets out there as a 'scoop'....smh
Sadly, as a general statement there is truth to that. Lauren seems pretty solid though. MOO.
 
Good point. It’s a Sunday, let alone Mother’s Day. He could’ve at least slept in with her and had breakfast together before spending the rest of the day in Denver.

Maybe 5 am because it allows him to avoid describing events of the morning with SM. She was sleeping.

MOO, speculation.
That, or maybe having to complete some "task" while it's still dark. To borrow a term now being used, it's a red flag to me, why not 6:30 a.m.? IMO he had to complete a task while still dark, or had to get to a place to dispose of something very early, or had to toss a bike off an embankment before dawn, or all of the above plus some deadline in Denver. Looks like he planned on having about 24 hours to set up the job site for his crew. Do we know what the job was in Denver, or what kind of setting up it would require?
 
Question: Did the Profiling Evil hosts credit Lauren Scharf with breaking the story about the anonymous family member coming forward with concerns? If the hosts did credit Lauren, I must've missed it. I ask because Lauren's write-up doesn't mention Profiling Evil yet both news sources spoke to an anonymous member of Suzanne's family that revealed information regarding Barry Morphew allegedly refusing a polygraph and voice stress tests.

I'm trying to determine if Lauren and the Profiling Evil hosts spoke to this one person separately or if there are two anonymous family members: one that spoke to Profiling Evil, one that spoke to Lauren. I guess a third possibility is that the hosts & Lauren/Fox 21 News are collaborating but have agreed to not attribute anything to each other for some reason.
 
@JosieMae
@EggSalad
I don't disagree but why so far away and on the highway? I've been leaning toward not staged due to the distance from the bike and not being on the bike trail itself. Love to hear your thoughts.
Just wanted to chime in @RumorMonger. It really wasn’t very far from where the bike was allegedly found to the vicinity of where the personal item was found. We don’t know the exact location, but the road was blocked on 50 just west of the intersection of 225 and, according to the PE guys, it was found on the opposite side of the road.
The speculation was that either the abductor or SM threw something out the window as she was being spirited away.
I’ve attached a screen grab from google earth.
 

Attachments

  • 9ED0FE77-F671-46E3-A2DD-32277C81642A.jpeg
    9ED0FE77-F671-46E3-A2DD-32277C81642A.jpeg
    316.7 KB · Views: 42
Sadly, as a general statement there is truth to that. Lauren seems pretty solid though. MOO.

I like the fact that Lauren is willing to "commune" with citizen journalists/YouTubers and take questions online. She definitely seems to understand that technology has been a great leveling wind in the news business: Literally, a Dad With a Phone can produce content that is more interesting and entertaining than some studios with hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment.
 
Question: Did the Profiling Evil hosts credit Lauren Scharf with breaking the story about the anonymous family member coming forward with concerns? If the hosts did credit Lauren, I must've missed it. I ask because Lauren's write-up doesn't mention Profiling Evil yet both news sources spoke to an anonymous member of Suzanne's family that revealed information regarding Barry Morphew allegedly refusing a polygraph and voice stress tests.

I'm trying to determine if Lauren and the Profiling Evil hosts spoke to this one person separately or if there are two anonymous family members: one that spoke to Profiling Evil, one that spoke to Lauren. I guess a third possibility is that the hosts & Lauren/Fox 21 News are collaborating but have agreed to not attribute anything to each other for some reason.
I don't think they mentioned Lauren, in the longer video, nor in the shorter condensed version. IIRC one of them said they spoke directly to the family member who specifically asked them to do a show on what the person was revealing to them, to try to get the case out into the sunlight. The main thing that perked up my ears is that, IIRC, the person told the PE guys that le had told the person additional facts beyond what PE was disclosing, regarding happenings of Saturday night. They kind of left that hanging there, that there were parts they could not yet disclose. That is my interpretation. I listened to both segments twice, trying to get caught up. Then I listened to the uncut Draper posting, where, indeed there were a whole bunch of "we"s coming from Barry, which the PE guys consider quite a field of red flags. It was nice to have LE guys analyzing a case.
 
I don't think they mentioned Lauren, in the longer video, nor in the shorter condensed version. IIRC one of them said they spoke directly to the family member who specifically asked them to do a show on what the person was revealing to them, to try to get the case out into the sunlight. The main thing that perked up my ears is that, IIRC, the person told the PE guys that le had told the person additional facts beyond what PE was disclosing, regarding happenings of Saturday night. They kind of left that hanging there, that there were parts they could not yet disclose. That is my interpretation. I listened to both segments twice, trying to get caught up. Then I listened to the uncut Draper posting, where, indeed there were a whole bunch of "we"s coming from Barry, which the PE guys consider quite a field of red flags. It was nice to have LE guys analyzing a case.

Interesting. If they spoke directly to the anonymous family member, then I wonder if (a) Lauren did as well in conjunction with them, (b) Lauren spoke to the same person separately, or (c) Lauren spoke to a different anonymous family member. The lack of attribution on Lauren's part makes me think that it's either (b) or (c). Lauren seems to view citizen journalists and YouTubers as colleagues, so it would seem to be out of character for her to interview the
anonymous family member along with Profiling Evil and then omit any mention of it in her write-up.
 
Interesting. If they spoke directly to the anonymous family member, then I wonder if (a) Lauren did as well in conjunction with them, (b) Lauren spoke to the same person separately, or (c) Lauren spoke to a different anonymous family member. The lack of attribution on Lauren's part makes me think that it's either (b) or (c). Lauren seems to view citizen journalists and YouTubers as colleagues, so it would seem to be out of character for her to interview the
anonymous family member along with Profiling Evil and then omit any mention of it in her write-up.
Maybe the person contacted Lauren first, and then Lauren turned the person on to PE and they contacted Pe, or maybe Lauren told the pe guys that the family member was open to more exposure. Looking around on yt, I didn't see any of the usual creators bragging about being contacted, but lol a couple of them were grousing about not caring that they weren't contacted.
 
They are not current photos so they may be from older sm posts by SM. Actually, I think @osu posted one of the photos used on the flyer and can probably lead you to the source. (I don't recall if linked).

I found the photo used on the current missing poster by doing a Google Image search for “Suzanne Morphew”. Suzanne Morphew | MISSING PERSONS CENTER
 

Attachments

  • 6B8352C1-C1E8-446C-BF10-F0FD6924E2F7.jpeg
    6B8352C1-C1E8-446C-BF10-F0FD6924E2F7.jpeg
    79.1 KB · Views: 19
I'm pretty sure that when journalists speak of anonymous sources, they simply mean that the person asked to not have their name publicly revealed.

That does not mean that the reporter themselves don't know exactly who they are talking to (and have independently verified it).

The use of and protection of anonymous sources close to the subject/matter at hand are a vital part of investigative reporting.
 
I noticed three things about the PE live...
1) They said before the communication with her girlfriend ended abruptly, “the conversation changed”..... I wonder if Suzanne was relating to her friends troubles with her marriage...?

2) The PE guys insinuated they knew exactly what BM was doing Saturday evening.... cleaning up a mess? Hiding a body?

3) There were two cars in the drive & neither belonged to BM. I’m thinking this is significant. Possibly someone who helped him ?

what do you think?
 
Maybe the person contacted Lauren first, and then Lauren turned the person on to PE and they contacted Pe, or maybe Lauren told the pe guys that the family member was open to more exposure. Looking around on yt, I didn't see any of the usual creators bragging about being contacted, but lol a couple of them were grousing about not caring that they weren't contacted.

When Lauren’s source was questioned her response was “The person who gave me the information in the article was a reliable source and has worked very closely with the case.” I could link to her FB comment but I am not sure I should do that.
 
This is at the bottom of my comments the last day or so, and it came about in order to explain why two cars in the driveway was significant for the neighbor: what if we toss out some of the many assumptions we've been developing since Mother's Day? Would we then have a less precarious explanation for some of the pieces in this case?
We did a good job early on IMO by ditching the idea that there was verifiably a bike ride (it seems to have been a product of BM's butt-covering), but a lot of assumptions have still survived in our discussions. So, what if we toss some out, and see what we get?

On my list of assumptions:
-that BM staged SM's bike; he could have staged someone else's by mistake
-that if someone threw out an item onto the highway, that BM did the throwing; it could have been SM or someone else: we don't know.
-that BM went to Denver and was there all day; what if he was back in Salida for part of the day, or took two trips?
-that the phone call to neighbors happened when he was in Denver, when he presumably could have been in Salida
-that when he said he last saw SM at 5 am, he's making a red-herring fake time stamp, (so, so clever isn't he, for thinking of everything?), and he was actually in Denver in those early morning hours, or somewhere else entirely at 5 am?
-that the work trip to Denver where he was clearing property was merely an excuse to haul equipment to Denver (or en route), equipment that he could use to bury a victim at someone else's build site entirely?

I'm sure other posters can think up more assumptions...

I like where you are coming from with this exercise...it’s a good idea to think outside the box and shake things up a little in search of new theories. You have come up with some very good ideas to consider while trying to reimagine some of our more accepted assumptions or scenarios... like we did with the staged bike ride to see what else would work. I also like your idea of BM saying he left Suzanne sleeping at 5 am being a “red herring time stamp”. Because BM leaving Suzanne asleep in her bed on MD at 5 am without even saying goodbye just sounds like a bold face lie to me. Oh and BM “staging” the personal item(s) could just as easily be him accidentally dropping those items by mistake in the dark. And I like the last idea on your list about the job set up being an excuse to move equipment to Denver...most everyone assumes her remains are close to home (with good supporting reasons) but there is also just as good of a reason to suspect she could have been taken to Denver or buried along the way. Or taken to a place BM hunts or some other location that is familiar to him or a place he and Suzanne have gone together.

What if we changed the biggest assumption of all...that BM did it?! :confused: That might be going too far!
 
Last edited:
Maybe the person contacted Lauren first, and then Lauren turned the person on to PE and they contacted Pe, or maybe Lauren told the pe guys that the family member was open to more exposure. Looking around on yt, I didn't see any of the usual creators bragging about being contacted, but lol a couple of them were grousing about not caring that they weren't contacted.
The PE guys said over and over, how honored they were that the family trusted them enough to speak to them.
I think Lauren facilitated the contact, JMO.
 
Question: Did the Profiling Evil hosts credit Lauren Scharf with breaking the story about the anonymous family member coming forward with concerns? If the hosts did credit Lauren, I must've missed it. I ask because Lauren's write-up doesn't mention Profiling Evil yet both news sources spoke to an anonymous member of Suzanne's family that revealed information regarding Barry Morphew allegedly refusing a polygraph and voice stress tests.

I'm trying to determine if Lauren and the Profiling Evil hosts spoke to this one person separately or if there are two anonymous family members: one that spoke to Profiling Evil, one that spoke to Lauren. I guess a third possibility is that the hosts & Lauren/Fox 21 News are collaborating but have agreed to not attribute anything to each other for some reason.

I listened, several times, to the special PE live and it was made clear that the family member(s) of SM contacted PE. I never heard Fox21 or LS mentioned during the entire live session.

I think it bears repeating that SM has a father, brothers, and sisters, both bio and step-siblings that she was close to. It's possible that one or more talked with PE and/or LS. It's possible that the family members elected a spokesperson to represent the lot. Or it could be one sibling going rogue.

The following day, SM reported her own story about BM's GPS not consistent with information BM gave to the police, citing unnamed family as her source. There were no details about the data discrepancy, or how it varied. She also featured a childhood friend of SM's and the story of how they battled cancer together. Another news agency, citing Fox21's report, contacted CCSO for comment on the information in the report, and the Sheriff declined to comment.

Not sure what you getting at. And why does any of this matter?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
58
Guests online
2,317
Total visitors
2,375

Forum statistics

Threads
602,342
Messages
18,139,362
Members
231,354
Latest member
Akwy
Back
Top