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

[Deleted member 102539]

We have no idea if that house has a private mortgage, or if they already have maxed out whatever equity was available. Or what kind of credit rating they have. It's not like you can walk into a bank and say, hey I need 250k and the bank says, sure, just sign here.

Because I heard, there was no mortgage on the PP home, I wondered about SM's inheritance put into the house. BUT I have no idea at all about things like that, completely uneducated unfortunately.

 

[Lilypad13]

She does meet the definition of an "incapacitated person" under Indiana Code § 29-3-1-7.5: an individual who...cannot be located upon reasonable inquiry.

Many people on WS have criticized § 29-3-1-7.5, perhaps with good reason, but it's still good law.

Good law used for a nefarious purpose. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should and it doesn’t make it right morally. IMO

 

[kkdj]

I think, MG knows more and better, what BM was up to than we know today. But I believe, what she said so far.

That's probably it exactly. The sin of omission.

 

[oviedo]

Good law used for a nefarious purpose. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should and it doesn’t make it right morally. IMO

I’d like to find the discussion that went with this statute - in my state, we publish that so you can see what the thinking behind it is ...

 

[kkdj]

Because I heard, there was no mortgage on the PP home, I wondered about SM's inheritance put into the house. BUT I have no idea at all about things like that, completely uneducated unfortunately.

I think there was no recorded mortgage at least. Heck, it might be owned free and clear, or at least what SM thought.

 

[kkdj]

Good law used for a nefarious purpose. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should and it doesn’t make it right morally. IMO

Then imo the law should be more distinctive. Ambiguous doesn't cut it.

 

[Lilypad13]

I’d like to find the discussion that went with this statute - in my state, we publish that so you can see what the thinking behind it is ...

Me too! Doubt it addresses being declared incapacitated by the same person who incapacitated you. Allegedly. IMO.

 

[Warwick7]

.

 

[kkdj]

dbm

 

[Madeleine74]

I think property laws and financial stuff related to that is not quite as obtuse as perhaps some think. The deed on a house or property is not fake. The county records are certified by the Registrar, that's a big part of their job. If there's no mortgage then why would it be imagined there must be a mortgage? SM's signature would have been required for any legit mortgage or loan. And any creative borrowing of money in exchange for property rights would be reflected legally somewhere.

IMO

 

[Fireflize]

Random thought - I wonder if BM had a key to MG’s car?

Clever question! If BM was afraid to use his truck for an evil errand, he wouldn't want to go knocking on doors to borrow a different one. But he could have had a key to MG's car or there could have been a vehicle parked at the Salida job site with a key under the floor mat.

If he was able to nefariously get another vehicle, he could also have tried to to set that person up for murder.

Moo

 

[Hoss569]

Random thought - I wonder if BM had a key to MG’s car?

I wonder if he had a key to her place.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Just jumping off your post - the article link above mentions a female bicyclist that same day, but I also thought I saw a short interview at one point that also included a male bicyclist who mentioned biking in SM's area that same day? Anyone, am I removing correctly? Just curious and JMO

Yes, early in the investigation there was a male cyclist interviewed, very brief, he just said something about being in the general area that day. There wasn't any more to it than that.

 

[MrsWatson]

Yes, early in the investigation there was a male cyclist interviewed, very brief, he just said something about being in the general area that day. There wasn't any more to it than that.

I think that's the guy I was thinking of.

 

[Megnut]

Hmmmm.... maybe it wasn't JUST the truck sound MG heard, but the sound of the truck STARTING! A much more abrupt sound, than the sound of an approaching then arriving truck, especially if one is asleep. Unknown to MG, was the truck parked in her lot from midnight to 4 am? I hope LE has been able to rake EVERY car BM may have had unfettered, overnight access to, with or without the owner's knowledge. We've seen that strategy before.

Possibly, if she hadn't heard him, by sleeping through it, he wouldn't have had to bring her on board to round up a crew until after daybreak at least.

Looks like loudness spoiled covert operations on both ends of the night.

JMO

 

[Sillybilly]

Just jumping off your post - the article link above mentions a female bicyclist that same day, but I also thought I saw a short interview at one point that also included a male bicyclist who mentioned biking in SM's area that same day? Anyone, am I removing correctly? Just curious and JMO

In the video in this linked article, the interview with the male bicyclist FB starts at about the 34 second mark through 1:00. He talks about seeing a vehicle that should not have been there.

 

[Hoosierfan72]

Here's what I can't quite wrap my head around re: MG's 4 am account vs. BM's 5 am account.

Assuming MG is correct, if you are BM - why lie? There has to be a reason. I think it's reasonable to assume every person knows LE can track your phone. I'm not sure every person would know that LE can track your car.

• If we assume that BM did know both, then maybe a vehicle switch makes sense. He leaves his phone at home (or with him and turned off), drives to MGs house, switches vehicles and does his nefarious acts. What doesn't make sense with that is the report he was texting co-workers before 5 am from the road. Clearly, if that's true, it conflicts with his leaving at 5 am story and wrecks his entire carefully planned alibi.
• Maybe BM was simply panicking and coming up with an alibi on the fly. Maybe he drove to MG's house to pick her up, got there and thought better of it. The problem with this is - given the chlorine smell in the hotel room, would he really have MG ride in his truck if he's going to "clean up" at the hotel? Also, it doesn't explain why he would lie about what time he left the house (wouldn't it just be easier to say you left at 4, drove to MGs house and decided against picking her up), knowing that LE would be able to track his phone and detect the lie?

I just think we're missing an important piece or pieces of info related to this. It doesn't make any sense, IMO.

 

[Hair of the Dog]

We have no idea if that house has a private mortgage, or if they already have maxed out whatever equity was available. Or what kind of credit rating they have. It's not like you can walk into a bank and say, hey I need 250k and the bank says, sure, just sign here.

If they have a home equity line of credit aka a HELOC, that is secured by the property, it would be recorded. Same with a private mortgage. The lender's deed of trust/mortgage needs to be of record to ensure their priority in the event they need to foreclose to get their loan repaid.

MOO

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

Here's what I can't quite wrap my head around re: MG's 4 am account vs. BM's 5 am account.

Assuming MG is correct, if you are BM - why lie? There has to be a reason. I think it's reasonable to assume every person knows LE can track your phone. I'm not sure every person would know that LE can track your car.

• If we assume that BM did know both, then maybe a vehicle switch makes sense. He leaves his phone at home (or with him and turned off), drives to MGs house, switches vehicles and does his nefarious acts. What doesn't make sense with that is the report he was texting co-workers before 5 am from the road. Clearly, if that's true, it conflicts with his leaving at 5 am story and wrecks his entire carefully planned alibi.
• Maybe BM was simply panicking and coming up with an alibi on the fly. Maybe he drove to MG's house to pick her up, got there and thought better of it. The problem with this is - given the chlorine smell in the hotel room, would he really have MG ride in his truck if he's going to "clean up" at the hotel? Also, it doesn't explain why he would lie about what time he left the house (wouldn't it just be easier to say you left at 4, drove to MGs house and decided against picking her up), knowing that LE would be able to track his phone and detect the lie?

I just think we're missing an important piece or pieces of info related to this. It doesn't make any sense, IMO.

Maybe Barry wanted to ask MG if he could borrow her car, but after he arrived at her residence he changed his mind.

 

[LietKynes]

I think he lied. I don’t think he left her at 5am. I think we now have heard from a few sources that he was gone by 4:00am (MG- at her house idling in driveway and AM saying 4:30 rambling and texting to get work crew together). He lied from the sources we have heard from that are cited from @oviedo and her great work on the media thread. He was busy well before 5:00 am. I’m not sure what job of his he was attending to at 4:00 am. Jack of all trades...master of none?

Ita.
This makes me wonder if Suzanne died on late Fri. early Sat. ?
We also don't know when the texting ceased or when BM started to send messages from her phone or from his--pretending to be Suzanne.
Messages that seemed out of character and alarming to the friend.
Imo.