Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #4

[lucidtx]

From the Chaffee County Search and Rescue website:

Sheriff personnel called members of Chaffee County Search and Rescue South and North and a search began immediately. The Department of Corrections was also contacted and a request was made for tracking dogs to assist. They responded and joined the search. The search continued into the early morning hours with no results.

Search and Rescue resumed the search early Monday morning. They once again scoured the area. Members were then called from the Chaffee County Tactical Team along with search parties from the Department of Corrections and the area was once again scoured.

In all over 100 personnel were used during the search of the Maysville area, however by late Monday afternoon, Morphew had not been found.

Spezze said the search and the investigation are both still active.

Maysville woman missing - Chaffee County Search & Rescue - North

Yeah, if it was more of a lost/injured situation, we'd likely see a lot more resources from neighboring counties and across the state. Instead, they're keeping it pretty limited to the local SAR team and LE.

Edit: to me that means they're more concerned about evidence and the integrity of the investigation than the possibility she could be out there in need of rescue.

 

[10ofRods]

The sheriff's office press release says this about the alleged bike ride: "[the reporting party] advised that their neighbor, Suzanne Morphew, age 49, from the Maysville area had reportedly gone for a bike ride in the area and failed to return home". That suggests to me that the neighbor did not actually see Suzanne out for a bike ride or heading out for a bike ride. If the neighbor (the reporting party) advised LE that Suzanne "reportedly" went out for a bike ride, that means that the neighbor was told this was a possibility / probability. If the neighbor had actually seen her on said bike ride or heading out for said bike ride, the statement would read, "the reporting party advised that they had seen their neighbor, Suzanne Morphew, age 49, out for a bike ride in the area". That they say "reportedly" where they do tells me that the alleged bike ride was reported to the neighbor, not that the neighbor saw it herself.

I think it also implies that whoever called the elderly neighbor informed them about the bike ride. So at some point between May 8 and May 10, the family must have communicated with Suzanne, and Suzanne mentioned a bike ride.

Either that, or the family made a guess, as the bike wasn't found until after the 911 call, as I read the various reports anyway. Since the family has said "the bike was found" on Sunday, I have been assuming the police found the bike.

 

[Crazyat]

Does anyone know if it is common for the Department of Corrections to be called and a request made for their tracking dogs when there is a missing person? Could it be that they were called based on perhaps one or more of their inmates have been recently released that they have concerns about? I also wonder when the Dept of corrections releases inmates if they set them up in a place to live or just let them out to go wherever?

 

[Boxer]

Does anyone know if it is common for the Department of Corrections to be called and a request made for their tracking dogs when there is a missing person? Could it be that they were called based on perhaps one or more of their inmates have been recently released that they have concerns about? I also wonder when the Dept of corrections releases inmates if they set them up in a place to live or just let them out to go wherever?

I believe they have leg trackers.

 

[kay74]

IMO, there could be many people who may have been aware that Suzanne would be alone that weekend.

No lengthy OT details here, but I personally knew someone whose daughter was attacked, left for dead, but survived strictly because she played dead. The perp knew she was alone because he was at a wedding reception with the parents when someone else asked where their lovely daughter was.

Oh WOW. In a a state I used to live in, there was a delivery person who went to a house and a young woman (an exchange student) staying there answered the door. He found out she was alone and he raped her and killed her. The worse part was her parents were so happy she was in this country.

 

[10ofRods]

I've been searching and can't find an answer to this. If someone consented to a search, is there any possibility that LE could seek a warrant just to support the fact that consent was given in the event consent was withdrawn or if consent was ever disputed at a later date?

Yes, certainly. There have been cases where a panicked or impaired person gave consent to search, and then felt they were railroaded by LE. So, I think it's more and more customary for LE to get an actual search warrant or for them to present formal consent paperwork to the parties involved. I think getting an actual search warrant in a case where a person is missing and may be kidnapped (and the family is indicating they believe it could be an abduction) would not be difficult. Kidnapping is the crime, and the house is the place that might hold some evidence.

We don't know that Mr. Morphew gave consent to search the house. I don't think we even know for sure what day the search took place. The story broke on Tuesday, IIRC (about the house being searched) but typically, that means it happened a day or two before Tuesday.

We also don't know at what point the family was told they could not re-enter the premises. At any rate, I'm guessing an early LE action was to go get a search warrant, once it became clear Suzanne was gone overnight. There may be other reasons as well.

If LE suspects a case might end up being a murder case, getting a search warrant is the most prudent course of action.

 

[Ravenesque]

I respectfully disagree. People don't stop in Mayville unless they've business in Mayville. It's a "blink and you miss it" dot (does it even have a stoplight?) off the freeway between Salida and Gunnison. People gas up in Salida or Gunnison and head over Monarch (or up/down 285 in Poncha Springs). Only Gunnison has been closed so no stopping in Gunnison for gas or bathroom breaks. That means anyone going over Monarch from Salida has to go 4 hours over two passes (Monarch and Cerro) and through Gunnison Gorge all the way into Montrose (if they stay on 50) without even a bathroom (well, there's one shabby gas station off 50 in Cimarron about 20 minutes from Montrose but at that point, you've already driven past it and it's best to just wait). That's one heck of a drive. Thus traffic on 50 has been very light compared to normal.

I am a native and had never heard of Maysville. Yikes

 

[swedeheart]

search now centers on the home. bike has been found.

other than that, same news.

Susanne Morphew Missing Woman Investigation Centers Around The Home

 

[lucidtx]

Does anyone know if it is common for the Department of Corrections to be called and a request made for their tracking dogs when there is a missing person? Could it be that they were called based on perhaps one or more of their inmates have been recently released that they have concerns about? I also wonder when the Dept of corrections releases inmates if they set them up in a place to live or just let them out to go wherever?

I've been wondering about that too. I can't think of another MP case in the state in which DOC searched. I assume they may have been called in because of the close proximity of the Buena Vista Correctional Complex, and that COs have LE training. It's a big group of people nearby who are capable of such a search and less likely to screw up the investigation by mishandling evidence.

 

[perception≠reality]

Over the years, I've come to the conclusion that WS members think about the verbiage in articles WAY more than the journalists who wrote them. I'm not saying I disagree with your thoughts on "reportedly," but just sharing a random thought I have about our interpretations of the data we get to discuss.

You’re so correct that journalists don’t think about their words as carefully as we do! I sometimes feel the press takes too many liberties with their wording, compared to the exact wording actually used by LE.

However, LE is very very specific with their wording, as in this release.

Reporters changing LE words from “reportedly left on a bike ride” to “she was last seen heading out for a bike ride” “Woman goes missing while out on a bike ride”. Two veeeery different statements. It also bugs me when they add their own guesses, that haven’t been confirmed or even reported. Originally, a family member reported that BM was out of town for work. That somehow morphed into “BM was at a training camp for firefighters” though this has never been confirmed at ALL. Literally just guesses from reporters and general public/sleuthers about exactly what kind of business or training he was conducting.Like a game of telephone.

When the statements come from LE rather than the press, I pay much closer attention every word they use or don’t use. Most LE officials are extremely careful with wording.

In the case of Faye Marie Swetlik, investigators said they discovered the body of Coty Scott Taylor at his residence, which was an important distinction. We all debated what that meant. Was he in his home? Outside? Near Faye’s body? Murdered as well? Suicide? It turns out he was not in his residence, but found deceased at his residence on his back porch.

It also factored into the wording from LE regarding Gannon Stauch, as they were very clear to say it was reported that Gannon was last seen leaving to play at a friend’s house. Reported, not “we know he was last seen leaving for a friend’s house”.

I pay close attention to those distinctions, because they usually do end up meaning something. Knowing something as fact, vs what was simply reported to them. In vs at, etc...

 

[oviedo]

search now centers on the home. bike has been found.

other than that, same news.

Susanne Morphew Missing Woman Investigation Centers Around The Home

and still no press conferences from LE? I'm monitoring the Sheriff's website but so far nothing. just the daily reports.

 

[Wowno17]

My biggest concern is a loner took her and left her body somewhere which would be next to impossible to find.

And the husband would be forever suspect number one.

MOO

 

[Rivkah11]

I'm not going to claim to be a journalism expert, but my recollection from journalism class (from YEARS ago) is that this is essentially reporting hearsay/rumor. The mother heard it from her daughter who allegedly is friends with BM/SMs daughter who may or may not have had first hand knowledge that nobody saw her mother on a bike (and, actually, could likely only have first-hand knowledge that the neighbor didn't seen SM on the bike as opposed to actually knowing that no one saw her on the bike). I think that's a long way around the barn - and while it may be true - I think it's published hearsay and I'd be cautious at this point about taking it as fact. JMO.

One of the Exercises in a course in my (2009)MBA program was to take 3 articles from MSM and “verify” the accuracy of the information in the article. It was eye-opening for me as one who routinely believed what I read if it was in MSM. Not one article was without errors as validated through sources easily found.

In 2016, my nephew was murdered and the unsolved crime was reported widely in TV, radio and print. It was discouraging, but not surprising, that not one single report got basic facts correct about the crime, the person, or the circumstances.

Relying on MSM “facts” may not be wholly reliable. Seasoned WS-ers know this already!
MOO

 

[MrsWatson]

Regarding the carefully crafted pressers LE often gives,I sometimes wonder if they have a special LE toll free number they call to figure out the proper wording & phrasing to convey exactly what they want to say,& to whom.

Another reason to listen to what LE says and does not say, to look for clues.

MOO

 

[Sillybilly]

We don't know that Mr. Morphew gave consent to search the house.

<rsbm>

And that is basically where I was going with the thought process. He may have gladly given consent for everything and the SW was strictly to back it up in case things changed. IOW, he may have given permission for the house, handed over his phone and his vehicle.

 

[Dave F.]

In reading today's insightful postings, one tiny question popped up in my mind. There have been lots of reports stating that her bicycle was found with the brakes locked. Several avid bikers have posted that is not likely, due to the braking system on higher-end mountain bikes. Now it is coming out that the bike may have been on, or under, a bridge. My mind tends to simplify things. What if the bike was locked to the bridge? with a standard secure cable bike lock system? In proximity to a bridge, could it have been cabled to the side of the bridge? I just have questions, no answers. JMO

 

[J.M. Bee]

OK, so a couple of thoughts on Barry's video plea (partial transcription below, link to video below): the first point I would make is that his choice of audience for the plea is ... interesting. It may even be unusual. I am not law enforcement or a statement analysis expert, so I can't say. What I can say, though, is that in making such a video/plea, Barry had three potential audiences: (i) the general public; (ii) the person or persons who might be responsible for Suzanne's disappearance; and (iii) Suzanne. Barry chose to address Suzanne, but he did so in such a way that he was simultaneously addressing the person or persons who might be responsible for her disappearance as well. "Oh Suzanne," he begins. "if anyone is out there who can hear this, that has you, please, we'll do whatever it takes to bring you back."

There are several things that are interesting about this. One, there is the fact that he chooses to address Suzanne. Why? Does he think she is going to be sitting somewhere where she might be looking at a TV or the internet? This seems unlikely. Two, it's almost as if he can't decide who he should address, as when he says "if there is anyone out there who can hear this," he is simultaneously addressing Suzanne, the general public and Suzanne's possible assailants. I feel like that's kind of weird. Why can't he settle on who he is addressing? Now, it could be just that he's worked up, anxiety-ridden, etc., and I get that, but if you're going to make a public video plea, wouldn't you organize your thoughts and prepare a little? Wouldn't you decide who you are going to address? And if you wanted to address several parties --- the public, the possible assailants, Suzanne herself --- wouldn't you address them in turn? Again, I acknowledge that his disorganization here could simply be a result of his frazzled state of mind, but I still think there's something not quite right about it.

Transcription:
Oh Suzanne,
if anyone is out there who can hear this, that has you
please, we’ll do whatever it takes to bring you back.
No questions asked.
However much they want.
I will do whatever it takes to get you back.
Honey, I love you.
I want you back so badly.

Link to article with the video plea:
'I'll do whatever it takes': Husband of missing woman makes tearful plea for her safe return

 

[pepper 34]

Where is that quote from? Because I read something else on MSM.

The quote was from the Daily Mail article we were discussing on Wednesday, 5-20. Here's the link and the quote is typed under one of the photographs in the article.

Police search and carry out evidence bags from the $1.5M home of missing Colorado mom | Daily Mail Online

 

[TristanP]

Perhaps that message was meant to rattle someone then?
JMO

Re: the request for video. I saw a post elsewhere that mentioned how they’d picked up on how they were asking for doorbell recordings, security camera recordings and trail cam recordings, and the trail cam part made them wonder if LE is looking for someone sneaking up to the house on foot.

Its definitely a possibility - we’ve all been caught up thinking about vehicles due to the rural area but hmmmmm...

If someone was sneaking up to the house to harm her, they may not have thought about trail cams.

 

[CuriousBystander]

If I say this wrong or somehow violate the TOS someone please advise as this is my second attempt - wouldn't it be possible for a person to use an alibi of being two hours away because he/she, for example, is attending a weekend training session, educational seminar, wedding...it doesn't really matter what. Leave his/her phone at that location and travel back to his/her home location, commit a crime back home, then return back to the location two hours away....virtually undetected by either traveling at night, using a rental car, or using a stolen car. Let's say the crime was either theft of property or perhaps another much more serious felony. The distance between the home location and the location two hours away would seem to allow for the disposal of evidence of any kind along the way.