Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #29

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Last Person to See Her Alive?
marylamby said:
...husband, who was the last self-reported person to see his wife alive ...
Click to expand...
:) @marylamby . sbm:) You make a good point here by stressing self-reported.
Presumably BM told LE something like --- SM was still sleeping in bed, when I left the house at [5:00 or 5:30 a.m.] and has repeated that to (others, nephew, youtuber TD, and ?) as well.

If BM said saw her at 5:00 and was actually the last to see her alive, then he must know, she -
- was killed by him? .................................................If so, BM was last person to see her alive.
- was killed by stranger-abductor? ..........................If so, abductor = last, but could BM know of abduction & death?
- was killed by abductor known to SM or BM? ......If so, abductor = last, but could BM know of abduction & death?
- was killed by his hypo accomplice/hitman?...........If so, his accomplice/hitman = last.
- died of natural causes and body vanished? .......... If so, BM = last, but how could he know? No body. Did not happen.
- committed suicide, disappeared own body?..........If so, BM = last, but how could he know? No body. Did not happen.

Aside from above logic, we don't know what we don't know, for example -
Has LE taken statements from two or ten ppl who said they saw her -
--- at 9:00 a.m. pulling car out of her driveway?
--- at 11:00 a.m., in front of Maysville business, pulling a newspaper/local rag out of a newspaper machine?
--- at 1:00 p.m., walking along U.S. hwy? etc.
Not saying or suggesting that anyone saw her like that or told LE they did.
But if someone told ^ to LE and was accurate & truthful, then BM was not last to see her alive.

Could BM know he was the last person to see her alive if he did not know when she died.
And if he knew when she died, well, hmmmmmmmmm.* jmy2cts

* Unless the mtn lion did it.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
WhoToYou25 said:
What if Barry is innocent?

Could someone point me to any physical evidence that he killed Suzanne.

I was afraid to make this post because I haven't been here long and I've seen how people are jumped on if they disagree. I hope we can discuss the evidence without attacking.
Peace.
Click to expand...
If you'll look at the first page of this thread, the moderators have a long list of sources that, if you watch or read them all, will catch you up quickly.
As for physical evidence, we out here in civilian land have no such evidence because LE has been very tight-lipped throughout the investigation and has not even told reporters whether a bike was found or what condition it was in. So you can't expect us to tell you about physical evidence -- the cops have it all sewn up.
 
Minordetails said:
If I’m a defence attorney, and my client is accused of the most grotesque act of domestic violence, and my client’s daughter is willing to testify that she never witnessed any domestic violence, and she is willing to provide a positive character reference on behalf of both her mother and her father - that’s both powerful and relevant.
IMO
Click to expand...

If I was still a prosecutor, I'd interpose two objections to the daughters' testimony*:
1. a Rule 401 relevancy objection
2. a Rule 403 objection

Remember that "relevance" in a legal sense has a specific meaning under Rule 401: Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. If I was still a prosecutor, I'd argue that the daughters' observations are not relevant: Just because a person has never been seen committing an act of domestic violence in the past doesn't mean that the person didn't commit a homicide in this case. I'd also argue that the daughters' testimony -- even if relevant -- would violate Rule 403 by "[creating] unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, [or] misleading the jury" because the jury may place too much weight on the daughters' testimony and ignore other evidence.

That being said, Rule 404(a)(2)(A) -- the so-called "Mercy Rule" -- actually does allow a defendant in a criminal case to present character evidence. This would allow the daughters to testify that their parents' marriage was only loving and peaceful. A judge may very well overrule my two objections and allow the testimony under Rule 404(a)(2)(A). However, then the State would get a chance to rebut this testimony with its own character evidence, which could possibly include many of the same observations that posters on WS have made: lack of speaking out, continuing to conduct financial transactions despite Suzanne's disappearance, etc. If he's ever charged and goes to trial, Barry Morphew's attorneys will have to decide if -- strategically -- employing such evidence is a good idea or too risky.

* If anybody wants to accuse me of violating the TOS because I'm mentioning the Morphew daughters' hypothetical testimony, then note that (a) I'm responding to a fine question by @Minordetails regarding the Rules of Evidence because (b) I'm a verified attorney.
 
WhoToYou25 said:
What if Barry is innocent?

Could someone point me to any physical evidence that he killed Suzanne.

I was afraid to make this post because I haven't been here long and I've seen how people are jumped on if they disagree. I hope we can discuss the evidence without attacking.
Peace.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's any known physical evidence, as traditionally meant. If you're wondering whether there are fingerprints or blood or similar, we just don't know. LE isn't telling us - and they aren't going to, until an arrest comes.

We don't even know, for sure, exactly what position the bike was in and we really have only BM's word (on the TD video) as to where it was. There are pieces of tape nearby, though, which seems to indicate LE found something in the little ravine near the Morphew house (presumably her bike). We do not know why LE focused so early on BM, or what personal item(s) of Suzanne's were found a bit further away.

So, some of us, due to long experience with crime stories (or professional experience with crimes), are using a variety of methods for attempting to deduce what could possibly have happened to Suzanne.

There's no evidence of a mountain lion or of a stranger abduction. No ransom calls.<modsnip: No MSM or LE reports to support such information stated as fact> Family members have said they are grieving. But that's not physical evidence that Suzanne is dead, obviously.

I believe Suzanne is no longer alive. Someone killed her. Not a mountain lion and not a stranger.

So I start there and examine the behavior of all known participants (and obviously BM, as the last person to see Suzanne alive, knows more than I do - but he has not been helpful to searchers or even to Suzanne's family).

Why not? What's his deal? Why is he moving forward with building a new house, with going to the gym, with life-as-normal (apparently) when his wife is missing? It's something to ponder. Why did he distribute just one "notice" of her disappearance (as far as we know), with so few details? Why not try to use resources to find her? He says he's searched vast amounts of territory, but won't tell anyone where that is or how they could also help...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
WhoToYou25 said:
What if Barry is innocent?

Could someone point me to any physical evidence that he killed Suzanne.

I was afraid to make this post because I haven't been here long and I've seen how people are jumped on if they disagree. I hope we can discuss the evidence without attacking.
Peace.
Click to expand...

You are 100% correct that there's no physical evidence. Indeed, almost 90 days after the warrants were executed, the probable cause affidavits (PCAs), warrants, and warrant returns are still sealed.*

There are all kinds of questions as to why Barry Morphew has acted the way that he has, but odd behavior is no proof that Barry had anything to do with Suzanne's disappearance. Moreover, there is still no proof of any motive; while the State doesn't have to prove a motive, an intentional killing usually does involve some sort of motive.

* In Colorado, it is apparently custom to keep PCAs, warrants, and returns sealed until a person is charged. As I've stated before, I find it disconcerting that the actions of the judiciary -- absent some indication that the contents of such documents would cause flight or destruction of evidence -- can remain cloaked for such a long time.
 
WhoToYou25 said:
What if Barry is innocent?

Could someone point me to any physical evidence that he killed Suzanne.

I was afraid to make this post because I haven't been here long and I've seen how people are jumped on if they disagree. I hope we can discuss the evidence without attacking.
Peace.
Click to expand...
Here’s 5 reasons why I have come to the conclusion that BM is responsible for SM’s disappearance.
1) LE is focused on him
2) BM is not behaving in a manner that would suggest he is innocent
3) <modsnip>
4) BM’s suggestion of the cat theory - he’s a hunter, he knows better
5) I’ve watched the TD / BM video again and I don’t get a good vibe

None of the reasons I listed on their own are enough to convince me, but together they’re strong enough to keep me off the fence.

MOO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MassGuy said:
There’s absolutely an argument to be made for both. For the record, I’m not talking about the legal definition of premeditation, but an event that was planned days (Or more) prior. This is why I don’t think it was premeditated:

As for the kids being gone, I think that may have allowed for a discussion that wouldn’t have taken place when they were around. I think Suzanne discovered an affair, or they argued over finances.

Barry left himself no time to work with, and screwed up badly enough that law enforcement seems to have known quickly that this wasn’t an abduction.

I think that alibi was thrown together last minute, as it makes no sense to me. You have a year to fix a problem, and you wait until Mother’s Day. And why the hell was it necessary to leave over 24 hours in advance?

If we are to believe the account that Suzanne’s text conversation stopped abruptly, and her social media started making strange posts, then that’s more evidence this wasn’t premeditated IMO.

I just think of this was planned, the crime wouldn’t look like this.
Click to expand...
How do you know it was a year to fix the wall problem?
 
Minordetails said:
Here’s 5 reasons why I have come to the conclusion that BM is responsible for SM’s disappearance.
1) LE is focused on him
2) BM is not behaving in a manner that would suggest he is innocent
3) <modsnip>
4) BM’s suggestion of the cat theory - he’s a hunter, he knows better
5) I’ve watched the TD / BM video again and I don’t get a good vibe

None of the reasons I listed on their own are enough to convince me, but together they’re strong enough to keep me off the fence.

MOO
Click to expand...

Do not forget the lies and inconsistencies. Jmo
 
Last edited by a moderator:
WhoToYou25 said:
What if Barry is innocent?

Could someone point me to any physical evidence that he killed Suzanne.

I was afraid to make this post because I haven't been here long and I've seen how people are jumped on if they disagree. I hope we can discuss the evidence without attacking.
Peace.
Click to expand...
This is probably the friendliest place you can post about Barry being innocent!
 
enelram said:
Oviedo,
Have we told you lately how appreciative we are
for all your efforts keeping the media thread updated?
A BIG SHOUT OUT TO YOU!!
Click to expand...
Thank you ! and it’s our sleuthers who post those MSM and maps on the MT so it’s easy for us to add - I often return to page 1 to remember how these stories unfold
 
WhoToYou25 said:
What if Barry is innocent?

Could someone point me to any physical evidence that he killed Suzanne.

I was afraid to make this post because I haven't been here long and I've seen how people are jumped on if they disagree. I hope we can discuss the evidence without attacking.
Peace.
Click to expand...

The evidence is going to be confidential and held by the detective team at the CCSO.
BM has a lot of inconsistent and nonsensical behavior and SM family has said he lied.
MOO Any reasonable person would conclude lying in the context of a case of a missing spouse is evasion or distraction for the purpose of deception to cover up a crime.
 
Last edited:
BTW, I'm more than willing to talk about "BM is innocent" scenarios. The thing that troubles me most about him is his constantly shifting stories. I'd have had an easier time believing him had he not communicated through others (nephew), and then given conflicting stories about whether he talked to Suzanne on Sunday morning (latest story is no, he did not - she was asleep when he left).

So, since no mountain lion, if we also posit BM didn't do it, it doesn't leave much. She didn't fall into the ravine along with her bicycle, then somehow feel well enough to climb out and then disappear completely from the nearby environment. She didn't walk 30 miles, staggering through brush, with a head injury. Doesn't happen, IMO. She would not have gotten far if she was injured, she would have been found the first night.

So someone took her. If not BM, then BM suggests "someone she knew well." I wish he'd say more on why he thinks this. Did she know some shady people? Or a person who could be obsessed with her? Surely he's named this person to LE in his 30 hours of interrogation.

Perhaps LE is looking for that person right now. But who could it be? BM suggests it's not a stranger (why does he say that?)

But, let's go with his theory. Someone Suzanne knows well (does BM not know this person at all? How does he know she knows a person who might harm her? It's possible he found out something after she was gone that makes him think this).

It would have to be someone from back in Indiana, someone she met on the internet, or someone from Salida. CBI and FBI did go to Indiana to interview people. So did someone travel from Indiana, wait outside the Morphew home until Barry left? If the bike thing was completely staged, then where did this evil person take Suzanne? Or did s/he kill her at home?

Did they stalk her for days, so that they knew BM wasn't home? How would they know BM wasn't about to arrive? Very risky perp behavior. There are cameras in the area, so those had to be evaded by this Indianan.

Or was it a Salida resident? This person had to show up at the Morphew residence on May 10, in order to stage the bike thing. Suzanne's car(s) were still there, so she didn't go into Salida to meet anyone. Salida is really small - not many candidates for this murderous "friend of Suzanne's." (She must have known them well - LE has not ever acted as if there were signs of abduction inside the house).

At any rate, BM's point of view is that she went on a bike ride and that he knew what she was wearing and that LE found the bike. Did this local stranger abduct her from her bike? Being unseen by all cameras?

It's very hard to get far with this theory. However, that doesn't mean that LE isn't working on such a theory. We simply don't know.
 
Warwick7 said:
For those who understand cell towers and cell graphs, I need a little help understanding what the PE guys were telling us.

Suzanne Moorman Morphew
Click to expand...
It looks to me to be a general description of how cell phones connect to towers in a certain area. LE would probably know approximately where BM was when he used his phone to text his daughters and to call the neighbor.

What I would be interested in is all the locations where there is no service, or whether or not the phone was turned off at a particular time or in a certain area. Can the location still be determined if there is no service? Did the truck have GPS? In what way did the GPS data not match Barry's story? Could that have been related to the time Barry mentioned that he was fixing something on his bobcat? Or whatever it was that he said.

Anyway, what I think might be important is where he was and what he was doing whenever he was "off grid," or in the areas where there was no phone service.

Imo
 
WhoToYou25 said:
What if Barry is innocent?

Could someone point me to any physical evidence that he killed Suzanne.

I was afraid to make this post because I haven't been here long and I've seen how people are jumped on if they disagree. I hope we can discuss the evidence without attacking.
Peace.
Click to expand...
Welcome to Websleuths! It's a friendly place for discussions. My own experience here is that posters respond in kind. Politeness begets politeness regardless of your viewpoint. :)
 
Last edited:
WhoToYou25 said:
What if Barry is innocent?

Could someone point me to any physical evidence that he killed Suzanne.

I was afraid to make this post because I haven't been here long and I've seen how people are jumped on if they disagree. I hope we can discuss the evidence without attacking.
Peace.
Click to expand...
Any “physical evidence” uncovered by law enforcement, wouldn’t be made public until an arrest and the release of the arrest affidavit.

The only evidence we have are the actions of law enforcement, the statements from Suzanne’s family, and the insanity of Barry’s account.

If one believes the CBI and FBI are somewhat competent, then they are not only projecting that this is a homicide investigation, but that Barry is a suspect as well.

Who would have guessed that a man that apparently doesn’t give a damn about his missing wife, could be responsible for her death? It would be nice if he at least feigned interest.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 54 more.
Total: 2,285 (members: 55, guests: 2,230)

Online statistics

Members online
55
Guests online
2,230
Total visitors
2,285
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,244
Messages
18,137,419
Members
231,281
Latest member
omnia
Back
Top