Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #46

[Hair of the Dog]

I agree. It reminds me of a photograph we saw of FD and JD, in which he stands there like a stick and she has her arms around him. Cannot locate it right now, but exact same dynamic, IMO. MOO.

There was a portrait that had an almost identical pose hanging on the wall in the master bedroom of the house in Indiana.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Woman 'woken by loud machinery' near where woman went missing | Daily Mail Online
It was this one. 3rd sentence

There's a really good reason they're known as the Daily Fail, and praised for their amazing photography. They're never too particular with the facts.

 

[10ofRods]

Exactly !

JMO

Wouldn't it be crazy if they already have DNA evidence from the chipper????

In which case, a lot of LE terseness would be explained. Mechanical thingie indeed.

Even if bleach were involved, I believe the chipper would still harbor evidence. All LE would need would be good connections between a suspect and that chipper. If I were the killer, I'd have been very worried indeed about tracking blood absolutely everywhere else I went that day/night.

 

[10ofRods]

Camping, which is an outdoors activity, was and is safe even with Covid. As long as people practice appropriate safe distancing, handwashing, and follow the recommendations, there's no reason camping can't or shouldn't happen. I don't see anything wrong with it, and it's been a vacation alternative for many in 2020. Being outdoors has never been restricted in states like CO, AZ and many others. In fact staying active outdoors has been encouraged in many states, mine included.

In the case with the girls going camping, it wasn't a big deal or dangerous. It's only notable because the girls were away, and being away coincided with their mother being disappeared. The girls could have been 2 hours away and SM still could have been killed and disposed.

As for the coolers, that's an interesting investigative detail. How many the M's had, what they were used for, how many remained. We won't know any of that until LE discloses it, someone else in the know discloses it, or it comes out at trial.

IMO

Sure, I'll accept your premise - unless there are restrooms in which case, the risk goes back up considerably.

But it's the traveling that makes a difference. Restrooms, again. Sewer pipes harbor CoVId.

Which is why, on May 3-10, essential travel was allowed. Recreational camping by young people is not essential, so it was outside of the local policies (which were of course not enforced).

But...Suzanne would have been at risk from the traveling party, had she lived to receive them back home. What would the risk have been? I don't know - but higher than Suzanne merely spending time in her own outdoor back yard, for sure. Young people also have a way of meeting other young people and having lively conversations which, even outdoors, can result in transmission.

The thing is, if the daughters (asymptomatically) brought CoVid home, that would have been a real risk for Suzanne.

Was Suzanne everyone's last priority?

 

[Minordetails]

Snipped for Focus:

I completely disagree with that assessment.

In fact, I don't think there's any logical basis for concluding that SM "ran the books" for BM's business. There's been nothing to suggest that she was at all involved in his business.

And there's no actual proof that he had a "well-oiled" or "successful" business.
I don't buy into the narrative that he's a successful businessman at all.

Further, there's nothing I've seen or heard that supports the notion of SM having control of any of the household reigns as far as the decision-making.

I would argue that the the evidence is pointing to quite the contrary, in fact:

As far as who was pulling the strings in that relationship, be they purse strings or any other variety, I am in no doubt as to who was in charge.

He's extremely manipulative.
Highly manipulative individuals do not, I repeat, do NOT, cede control to others.
They wrest it out of the hands of others.

The master puppeteer controls the strings.

JMO.

I think there is more evidence available to us to suggest that BM was a successful businessman, than evidence to suggest that he killed his wife; however, I believe both to be true.

JMO

 

[Ontario Mom]

What does it matter whether there was a camping trip affiliated with a church back in May or not? The past is the past and it cannot be changed. The girls did not (appear to) get Covid, and no one here knows what measures were taken for safe covid camping (the worst is always being assumed). Time to let it go.

Suzanne's demise was going to happen regardless--since the person who disappeared her was (IMO) planning on such an outcome at least somewhat and that person would have had many opportunities. The 'when' was likely variable.

IMO

I think we can all agree that the truth and the sequence of events, exactly as they happened, is what matters. All of it.

From why the kids weren't there that weekend, how that came to be, where they actually were, and with whom, and everything else leading up to when SM disappeared.

jmo

 

[Madeleine74]

The thing is, if the daughters (asymptomatically) brought CoVid home, that would have been a real risk for Suzanne.

Was Suzanne everyone's last priority?

What if...what if...what if...

Suzanne allegedly (and IMO, with no evidence to the contrary) had no problem with her daughters going on a camping trip in May, and as an acknowledged outstanding mom, and a woman who well knew of her own health challenges and risks, if it was OK with her that the girls went camping in May, then it's no one else's business in terms of what they should have done.


IMO

 

[mom2chloe]

I agree. It reminds me of a photograph we saw of FD and JD, in which he stands there like a stick and she has her arms around him. Cannot locate it right now, but exact same dynamic, IMO. MOO.

I saw that photo today that you speak of and had the exact same thought. Seems to me it’s not too hard to reciprocate the love through a hug in an image! IMO

 

[ChuckMaureen]

bbm

Are you referring to this?
In late May, investigators searched a residential property that had been one of Barry Morphew’s job sites. After an intensive, three-day search, authorities announced they did not find any evidence connected to Suzanne’s disappearance.
Because it was one of his job sites that he worked at.
I can't find anything saying he was the general contractor.

Colorado woman woken from sleep by loud noises, sounds of ‘running’ at construction site that was focus of Suzanne Morphew search — the night before she went missing: Report

Maybe it was that someone/something was being removed from that location that evening instead of someone/something being hidden.

 

[k-mac]

Snipped for Focus:

I completely disagree with that assessment.

In fact, I don't think there's any logical basis for concluding that SM "ran the books" for BM's business. There's been nothing to suggest that she was at all involved in his business.

And there's no actual proof that he had a "well-oiled" or "successful" business.
I don't buy into the narrative that he's a successful businessman at all.

Further, there's nothing I've seen or heard that supports the notion of SM having control of any of the household reigns as far as the decision-making.

I would argue that the the evidence is pointing to quite the contrary, in fact:

As far as who was pulling the strings in that relationship, be they purse strings or any other variety, I am in no doubt as to who was in charge.

He's extremely manipulative.
Highly manipulative individuals do not, I repeat, do NOT, cede control to others.
They wrest it out of the hands of others.

The master puppeteer controls the strings.

JMO.

GK you give him way too much credit!

He wouldn't be where he is today IMO without the backbone of an incredible woman quietly making it all happen in the back ground.

I don't think Suzanne seen herself as a victim until very recent times.

especially now we know he wasn't her POA. If he runs a tight ship how would this be?

moo

 

[Jo in Calif]

During Covid? I'm not sure why it surprises you. She was undergoing chemotherapy, she was immune-suppressed.

How is this a mystery?

Suzanne, a strong woman on many levels, overcame Hodgkins Lymphoma twice. Once before her children were born, and again as the Morphew family moved to Colorado. The family says they celebrated her last cancer treatment on October 1, 2019.

Suzanne was so happy on the day of her last treatment. She was still coming in for maintenance treatments, but the chemo was done and she was doing great.

“You don’t just see beauty when Suzanne is around, you feel it”: Friends describe missing Chaffee County woman | FOX21 News Colorado

 

[TKG]

bbm
sorry but I find this sentence really offensive.
Can you explain what a normal relationship looks like please?

I am completely reliant on my spouse financially and am at No RISK of DV.
No more than a friend whom works 40 hours a week and/or earns more than her spouse.

Often the little woman whom is isolated from the outside world actually runs the money. Because she has the time. Most busy working spouses are totally on board with the stay at home partner paying bills and money sorting etc

IMO SM ran his books and kept him a well oiled successful contractor.

We can see by his actions immediately after SM disappearance how sketchy and unprofessional he was with his staff and a dilemma execution.
On top of the no spousal POA is very telling about who pulled what strings and when.

All relationship dynamics are different. Just because she chooses to stay home by no means makes her relationship 'unnormal'.

in my opinion

While I appreciate the boldness of your claims, I have not found one source to substantiate any of it. I also understand that this may be YOO but I felt it important to clarify.

-There is no evidence that SM was involved in BM’s business in any way.

-The only evidence we have as a barometer of BM’s business was the one he sold in Indiana. Selling for over 1mm makes a case for a successful business. What transpired after the move is unknown, we only know he became a VOLUNTEER firefighter.

-IMO BM suffers as many before him with impulse control.

-The part of the equation that has me questioning the Normalcy of their relationship has nothing to do with her profession. It has everything to do with remote home, isolation over time, family members quoted “BM has been in control for a long time”, “the marriage was not hunky dory”.

Interestingly we have similar thoughts, we have just arrived in diametrically opposed ways.

That is, IMO one of the great parts of being in the WS community. I enjoy the varied opinions!

 

[10ofRods]

Barry definitely should've had a family spokesman from the beginning. While having one is no guarantee of avoiding insinuations, it would've created a buffer between the public & Barry. My view -- until hard evidence linking Barry to a crime is actually divulged -- is that he was probably in too much shock to think about a spokesman. However, I concede that there is an alternate argument: His plan didn't anticipate the need for a spokesman.

Surely by now he's over the shock?

And surely, by now, he has a reason to acquire one? Because he's not doing himself any favors by handling his own public "appearances."'

I agree that women who are more isolated from the outside world and fully dependent on their men, can easier become a victim of DV. They are easier to manipulate as they have fewer reference points to what a normal relationship should look like.
Although there are plenty working women who are victims of domestic violence. DV sufferers are not just one type of women. Unfortunately even highly educated women who are working in good positions can become DV victims.

The reasons why unemployed women are more likely to be DV victims (statistically - there's no arguing that) are complex. You touch on some of the main ones.

Obviously, not everyone is a victim of DV. Professional women like myself endure DV (but it was worse when I was unemployed - that's not uncommon either).

Statistically speaking, isolation is in and of itself a key element of escalating DV or DV in general. Isolation can include merely being unwilling to speak about the abuse, isolating oneself in order not to have to discuss it, abandoning friends who know about it, etc.

Just saying - because on WS, we are a group of both victims and non-victims. But a lot of us were victims and are now survivors.

For reference: my support network of other DV-survivors were mostly professional women, but as a teacher, I've also seen more DV perpetrated on vulnerable women without jobs than I care to think about.

 

[Feistyomi]

What if...what if...what if...

Suzanne allegedly (and IMO, with no evidence to the contrary) had no problem with her daughters going on a camping trip in May, and as an acknowledged outstanding mom, and a woman who well knew of her own health challenges and risks, if it was OK with her that the girls went camping in May, then it's no one else's business in terms of what they should have done.


IMO

We have a friend, diagnosed with second cancer, this time lung cancer, never smoked.
He went thru aggressive treatment, ending approximately March, April.
He then hibernated until last month at his lake house, neighbors brought him groceries, almost total isolation.
So last month they tested his immunity, said it was back to normal, and he has resumed normal covid protocol here in SC.
I never really had to deal with this up close and personal, so I don’t know if this is common or new test.
ITA, SM and her family knew the risk level for her, and they made a decision. based on that knowledge. We have few details on the camping trip, I’m confident the campers took appropriate steps to prevent covid outbreak, and I also agree, it really isn’t our business, and if my home invasion were true, it may have saved their lives.., my experiences, opinions, and theories,

 

[MassGuy]

GK you give him way too much credit!

He wouldn't be where he is today IMO without the backbone of an incredible woman quietly making it all happen in the back ground.

I don't think Suzanne seen herself as a victim until very recent times.

especially now we know he wasn't her POA. If he runs a tight ship how would this be?

moo

This is a man who has demonstrated his propensity for controlling behavior, time and time again.

You speak out, he lashes out.

You go near his property, he comes out with a gun.

You want an interview? You agree to his terms (no video).

I don’t think it’s any coincidence that both his interviews were conducted by women. I’m convinced he felt like he could control and manipulate them (Lauren played it beautifully).

I don’t think there’s any way that Barry would cede control of any aspect of his business (books) to anyone, to include his wife.

His show. His rules.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Along with the

"if one person got saved from this"

comment, I also find this suggestion attributed to a certain someone just as interesting:

"a run-in with someone who knows her well."

.
‘People don’t know the truth’: Suzanne Morphew’s husband breaks silence after 3 months | FOX31 Denver

Why would the certain someone qualify his theory that the person who may have abducted SM is someone "who knows her well"?

Did he mean the person 'knew her routine' and stalked her on her bike ride and attacked when the opportunity permitted (no other vehicles in sight)?

Or, did he mean the person is someone who would not cause concern for SM and that maybe she stopped her bike and let the person approach her and that explains why there were no (reported) signs of struggle (no scuff marks, no drag marks, no fluids)?

<modsnip>

To date, the pile of one-sided circumstantial we think we know doesn't look good for the certain someone. And the struggle deepens because the certain someone is either unable or refuses to offer believable explanation in defense. Not that he has to, IUPG, but it seems the certain someone is quite aware he is viewed through a heavy veil of suspicion and any logical person might assume he would want to explain away to clear himself from suspicion so that the investigation could proceed in proper direction.

We truly do not know whether or not the certain someone has completely cooperated with and/or has been cleared by LE. It is possible that LE might want a perceived veil of suspicion to linger so as not to alert an actual culprit as they pursue clues (i.e., guard-down tactics).

As I've indicated in previous posting, if it weren't for the certain someones' actions, lack of actions and disparate vocal regurges the theories he has presented could be viable possibilities.

I'm not sitting on the fence at this point, but I am leaning against it on one side (git'um!) for at least a little while longer... still too many unknowns. If this case extends to beyond this year with nothing of substance offered in a LE presser then I'll have to assume LE has no singularly-directional evidence. I hope I'm wrong but with each passing week I see a slowly-decreasing value on the thermostat.

 

[GordianKnot]

I think there is more evidence available to us to suggest that BM was a successful businessman, than evidence to suggest that he killed his wife; however, I believe both to be true.

JMO

LE has much more evidence available to them than we do.

Personally, I think LE's gathered a lot more evidence of the latter being true than the former.

I'm wondering whether FBI forensic accountants have discovered anything interesting over the course of the investigation so far.

It will be interesting to learn someday what a deep dive into the financial records revealed.

I strongly suspect the whole "successful businessman" house of cards is going to come crashing down as a result.

JMO.

 

[swedeheart]

Along with the comment, I also find this suggestion attributed to a certain someone just as interesting: .
‘People don’t know the truth’: Suzanne Morphew’s husband breaks silence after 3 months | FOX31 Denver

Why would the certain someone qualify his theory that the person who may have abducted SM is someone "who knows her well"?

Did he mean the person 'knew her routine' and stalked her on her bike ride and attacked when the opportunity permitted (no other vehicles in sight)?

Or, did he mean the person is someone who would not cause concern for SM and that maybe she stopped her bike and let the person approach her and that explains why there were no (reported) signs of struggle (no scuff marks, no drag marks, no fluids)?

<modsnip>

To date, the pile of one-sided circumstantial we think we know doesn't look good for the certain someone. And the struggle deepens because the certain someone is either unable or refuses to offer believable explanation in defense. Not that he has to, IUPG, but it seems the certain someone is quite aware he is viewed through a heavy veil of suspicion and any logical person might assume he would want to explain away to clear himself from suspicion so that the investigation could proceed in proper direction.

We truly do not know whether or not the certain someone has completely cooperated with and/or has been cleared by LE. It is possible that LE might want a perceived veil of suspicion to linger so as not to alert an actual culprit as they pursue clues (i.e., guard-down tactics).

As I've indicated in previous posting, if it weren't for the certain someones' actions, lack of actions and disparate vocal regurges the theories he has presented could be viable possibilities.

I'm not sitting on the fence at this point, but I am leaning against it on one side (git'um!) for at least a little while longer... still too many unknowns. If this case extends to beyond this year with nothing of substance offered in a LE presser then I'll have to assume LE has no singularly-directional evidence. I hope I'm wrong but with each passing week I see a slowly-decreasing value on the thermostat.

The "run-in with someone who knows her well" comment was probably the same line of thinking as friending a bunch of men on Suzanne's FB at midnight. He has been setting up the possible involvement of several people known to Suzanne, to confuse the narrative and misdirect away from his own involvement. He never dreamed people wouldn't buy his story, so he stays throwing blame at everyone but himself. He still has hope that one day somebody is going to buy one of his BS theories and he can disappear into the ether with his money, just like he planned.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This post lands at random.

Just as derogatory name changes are not allowed, neither are avatars that are designed to mock, ridicule or be disrespectful toward any case player.

There have been many such avatars removed in this discussion. Members whose avatars have been removed are asked to select another one that is more appropriate and which does not reflect poorly on Websleuths as a whole.

Keep it classy folks.

Thank you.

 

[Knox]

BBM
In one of the Dr. Phil interview videos with Andy, "the girls were on a camping trip with the church". It is mentioned around 3:35 in the following video
Husband Of Missing Colorado Woman Adamantly Denies Involvement In Disappearance

I have heard it was in Idaho too, but I'm not sure from where, as Idaho was not mentioned in this interview.

Thank you for finding this. I knew I had heard it Andy say it was a Church trip, but could not locate where.