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

[Dr.StClements]

CO - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #26
^^See the entire post quoted by OP for clarity at link #26 above.



@RumorMonger,
I don't believe I've had the privilege to know you or your posts so I apologize in advance if I get this wrong.

But before I advance one keystroke further, I have to say that I'm absolutely dumbfounded by OP's ability to retrieve my post of 18 August from three (3) locked threads ago. BRAVO??!!!

I'm sure I speak for others in desiring OP's knowledge of how to quote archived posts from a locked thread. Please tell! My practice limits me to only linking my locked posts from thread #26 (linked above for clarity).

I'm also not sure about this "putting me on the spot."
When one is addressed directly, is the courtesy of a reply not required?
(Don't say it-- probably another redundant British practice)...

OK, getting back to your stated assumptions that people that know the respondent and the family dynamics are supposed to speak for the missing person and protect their interest, and they are allowed and encouraged to have legal counsel themselves, I agree in part, and offer the following:

To be clear, my quoted posts on the matter of guardianship for a missing person are not intended to challenge or allege in any form that BM has done anything illegal or underhanded by petitioning for guardianship of SM.

I cannot find fault with BM, or any other petitioner, for using the only law available to them under the circumstances of a missing wife. That would make no sense to me.

However, what I am doing in this post is using BM's petition, and his circumstances, to further my opinion that serious flaws exist in the Indiana State Statute providing for guardianship of missing persons.

Indiana Law defines who is entitled to notice that a petition has been filed for your loved one and that a guardianship hearing has been scheduled. If you're not entitled to be notified, there is no provision in the IC for a guardianship petition hearing regarding your loved one to be publically advertised to alert or otherwise notify interested parties such as, in this case, SM's father, siblings, Godmother, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc.. People, that as you stated, are best suited to understand the family dynamics of the missing person in order to determine where intervention is needed.

More specifically, IC 29-3-6-1(a) states:

(4) If it is alleged that the person is an incapacitated person, notice of the petition and the hearing on the petition shall be given to the following persons whose whereabouts can be determined upon reasonable inquiry:

(A) The alleged incapacitated person, the alleged incapacitated person's spouse, and the alleged incapacitated person's adult children, or if none, the alleged incapacitated person's parents.

Applying the Indiana guardianship rules pursuant to IC 29-3-6-1(a) to BM's circumstances and petition for guardianship of his wife, only two people were required notified that the serious issue of guardianship of SM was even before the Indiana court. I don't understand how any intervention, as you stated, would be possible under this law.

(A) The alleged incapacitated person [SM], [missing, cannot be notified],
the alleged incapacitated person's spouse [BM],
and the alleged incapacitated person's adult children [MM],
or if none, the alleged incapacitated person's parents [not applicable].

According to public records, BM filed a Petition to Establish Guardianship of SM and other documents including Consent of Interested Party in Hamilton County, IN, on June 1, 2020 - only weeks after SM was reported missing. Court records also indicate a Motion was filed to Waive the Hearing, and by Court Order, BM was granted Temporary Guardianship of SM on June 5, 2020.

In the Hamilton Superior Court 1, Hamilton County, Indiana
Case No. 29D01-2006-GU-000096

A Guardianship Has been established for:
Suzanne R. Morphew
Incapacitated Adult/Minor
Year of Birth: 1971
Guardianship Type: Temporary

Guardian(s) Guardianship Of Issue Date Expiration Date
Barry L. Morphew Individual and Estate
6/5/2020
9/3/2020

https://public.courts.in.gov/grp/Search/Detail/187708?Detail=True
Indiana Supreme Court public access case search - MyCase

Since June 5, 2020, BM has had Letters of Guardianship for SM, empowering him to have full control over his Ward's (wife) entire estate without anybody ever knowing except for his adult daughter (and/or anyone BM chose to tell or confide in).

Reportedly, none of SM's family had any knowledge whatsoever that the issue of SM's guardianship was before any court! If not for a reporter reaching an unnamed sibling, seeking any comment about BM selling real estate located in Hamilton County, IN while SM was missing, it's quite likely they still would not know that BM was granted guardianship by court order.

Again, let me be clear that according to Indiana law, BM had/has no legal requirement and was under no obligation to inform anybody about his petition for guardianship except for his adult daughter, who also provided her consent. BM is guided by the law for missing persons, and it's my position that Indian law fails to protect missing persons including SM.

It's my opinion that Indiana law approving a grieving spouse and adult child--probably in shock, to consent to life-changing decisions on behalf of their missing wife and mother (pretty much in secret), less than a month since she vanished does not adequately protect the missing, respondent. I believe it was the fore founders of probate court that recognized the need to prohibited certain actions for six months as a safeguard to protect the grieving from bad decisions during a fragile period.

To answer your last question, I do not believe the solution here is "just providing a free lawyer."

I've made other suggestions on what I think the Indiana General Assembly might consider changing in a subsequent post in closed Thread #26, linked below.

CO - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #26

CO - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #26

MOO

Thank you for these insights, Seattle1.
Reading the information makes me feel physically sick - a real physiological reaction to what I see as a gross injustice. I can't remember where I first read that Suzanne comes from a family who have built up their businesses and are financially comfortable as a result, and that during the earlier years of SM and BM's marriage, Suzanne's parents helped them financially.
If that is the case - irrespective of how financially healthy the couple is now - I find the current situation even more sickening.
I get that there was a house sale in progress before SM went missing and that in order to complete the sale, BM had to seek help via the courts to complete the sale in July 2020.

However, I find it offensive in the extreme that he has free rein to do what he wants with their joint assets only a month after Suzanne first goes missing.

Would there have been any way for the courts to have limited BM's authority to the one transaction (house sale)? It beggars belief that oversight is vested only in the older daughter. What a responsibility to place on her when she is already so traumatized and grieving for her mother.

 

[gitana1]

The eventual jury pool? Saw a Dateline tonight on David Martin Hawk who was convicted of killing his ex-wife.
A lot of similarities to this case. He too was very concerned about the public's perception.

I started to watch that but didn’t finish. So don’t tell me the outcome! But soon while watching I felt there were some big similarities with BM in terms of attitude and going after the cops.

I’ve not see that level of criticism so early on in a case at all, on the part of anyone who was innocent. It’s usually only after a long time - many, many months, if not years- or after the case is solved (but could have been solved earlier) that some innocent people will start to criticize the police for mishandling their loved one’s case.

 

[susiQ]

Thank You. You have been very helpful. Before I made the post I read up on the threads here. It was a bit scary because it seemed everyone felt like Barry was guilty and I thought I would get eyerolls when I posted my theory but you have been so patient with your answers.
I can't explain why I feel BM is not guilty but I do. Waiting on some physical evidence before I jump to the guilty side.

No rush! We’ll be here waiting for you

 

[Gigi3]

The focus on excavating the property he worked at and his comment about the bobcat has me very afraid that this will be just like Kelsey Berreth- nothing left to find.

I fear you may be right, but I hope not.

I find the comment about the Bobcat so strange. Clearly the statement was a rebuttal to the family’s comment about the vehicle GPS data not matching up, however, BM says it was an inconsistency with a mechanical “thing” for the Bobcat.

It sounds as though, he may have made a slip up while trying to explain the GPS data? Of course, I believe he’s made more than one slip up throughout this whole case. JMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

The focus on excavating the property he worked at and his comment about the bobcat has me very afraid that this will be just like Kelsey Berreth- nothing left to find.

Unfortunately I agree with you Gitana, I don't believe Suzanne's remains will be found either. I believe her murderer had ample experience in digging and burying things.

Like Kelsey, Jennifer Dulos, Susan Powell, Natalie Holloway and so many more. I cannot imagine the pain these families have gone through.

 

[Sportn]

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.

Doesn't Barry know her pretty well?

 

[Error505]

There was footage taken over a much longer period of time. I saw it when the early LE reports came out about searching the Morphew house. I hadn't at that point viewed the PE website at all (wasn't aware of it).
Apologies - I don't have a link, but it might be worth going back to search early LE helicopter/drone footage, rather than look for it on PE w/s. The footage they have is MUCH briefer - the original seemed to go on forever.

I linked the video, 13 minutes long from NBC news.

This is chopper video approximately 13 minutes long, Morphew residence footage by NBC

 

[Puzzles8]

Candle lit for Suzanne.

May you and your family find Peace.

 

[Brubon]

As it's 8PM here and I won't be awake at 8PM IN time I have lit a candle for Suzanne now.

Will be interesting to wake up tomorrow to see who was present or not.

I have lit a candle for Suzanne...file too large to show.
Prayers to, "Baby Cheese Chips" as my 2 year old grandson calls Him. We need Suzanne found, please.
IMO

 

[Boxer]

Good points.

About #3, a question for attorneys or those with more experience following criminal investigations: For the search warrants to be sealed, wouldn't LE have provided information not only that evidence of criminality would likely be found in the house, but ALSO that to disclose the details in the search warrant (ie. the indicators of probable cause, the specific types of evidence they are searching for, and what they have found) at this time would likely impede their continuing criminal investigation?

When I look back at Gannon S., the police were first suspicious of LS due to lies and erratic behavior. They had a sealed search warrant for her Tiguan by Feb 1. Which was the 4th day after his disappearance, quickly followed by sealed house and device search warrants.
They conveyed nothing to the public, their searches told the story.

 

[Topppps]

Can anyone make out wear bm says he was at 3:18

 

[OldCop]

yes, and also CCSO has only 2 full time detectives on the force.
I'm not familiar how they pull in assistance from other LE branches this long after the crime, but those 2 detectives must be working overtime with all the evidence.
seems like a massive job to me.

It is likely that RM-RCFL (Rocky Mountain Regional Computer Forensics Lab) of which CBI is a partner will do the digital forensics analysis, CBI will do most of the forensics of other evidence unless it is particularly complicated, at which time it would be sent to the FBI lab, and they would do some of the out of state and out of county interviews and follow-ups, CCSO will write search warrants, do local interviews, and otherwise follow up on any new leads. So even though CCSO has only the 2 detectives, they actually have a large team working with them on the case.

 

[Seattle1]

Would there have been any way for the courts to have limited BM's authority to the one transaction (house sale)? It beggars belief that oversight is vested only in the older daughter. What a responsibility to place on her when she is already so traumatized and grieving for her mother.

^^RSBBM

In my opinion, there is not a way under IN law to limit BM from using his temporary letters of GUA other than terminating his guardianship at the upcoming hearing.

BM is simply being guided by laws that might be advantageous to him. Laws that also provide for a terrible burden on a traumatized family.

MOO

 

[MassGuy]

Can anyone make out wear bm says he was at 3:18

“I was in Denver, so I didn’t get here until 9 o’clock that night.”

 

[TKG]

Candle lit for Suzanne.

May you and your family find Peace.

Here too. Wishing the family some closure and peace. #justiceforsuzanne

 

[Topppps]

“I was in Denver, so I didn’t get here until 9 o’clock that night.”

He says that at 6:48 I can’t make out where he said he was at 3:18

 

[Gigi3]

Did we ever learn if the Morphews had a landline?

Yet, another reason I would not leave my wife alone if there had been any threats. I would want to make sure she could make a call out for emergencies.

It also makes me wonder how BM was able to conduct/handle business calls if cell reception was so spotty.

 

[Nerissa]

When I look back at Gannon S., the police were first suspicious of LS due to lies and erratic behavior. They had a sealed search warrant for her Tiguan by Feb 1. Which was the 4th day after his disappearance, quickly followed by sealed house and device search warrants.
They conveyed nothing to the public, their searches told the story.

There is so much in the timeline, the story, the shift-shaping story of BM plus - what we know of crimes of this nature that lead me to suspect BM

But most of all it's the direction of LE.....excavating BM's worksite isn't just some hair in their booty: there's a good reason (& that was only one of NINE major searches)

The entire direction of LE: no corroboration of the bike ride, no official release of 'last seen/last wearing/where went missing', nothing but asking for surveillance to be kept by residents: no looking for a particular vehicle or description of possible perps, no call to be alert or cautious....

It's LE itself that has me thinking BM is guilty

JMO

 

[TKG]

He says that at 6:48 I can’t make out where he said he was at 3:18

@MassGuy is correct. “I was in Denver, I didn’t get here until 9:00 that night”. 3:18

 

[TKG]

Did we ever learn if the Morphews had a landline?

Yet, another reason I would not leave my wife alone if there had been any threats. I would want to make sure she could make a call out for emergencies.

It also makes me wonder how BM was able to conduct/handle business calls if cell reception was so spotty.

Great question!!