I understand that defense attorneys are in the spin business. Their interpretations of information are biased and are intended to create a favorable impression of their client.
While defense counsel should not make a false statement of fact or law or offer false evidence, to a court, lawyer, witnesses, or third party, they may suggest inferences that may reasonably be drawn from the evidence (
https://www.americanbar.org). In evaluating Mr. Morphew’s counsel’s interpretation of the autopsy results it would seem that she was walking close to the line between false statement and reasonable inference.
NBC 9News in Denver reported: "Barry Morphew is innocent and he could not have killed his wife," said Jane Fisher-Byrialsen, one of Barry's attorneys. "She got up the morning of Mother's Day, had her cup of coffee, that is now confirmed with the autopsy report.”
The scientific and forensic literature clearly show that detecting caffeine in the bone marrow of Suzanne’s body does not even prove ingestion of coffee on Mother’s Day and certainly does not show that Mr. Morphew could not have killed his wife.
Caffeine (1,3,7-trimethylxanthine for you science nerds) is commonly measured
postmortem in bone marrow (see
Postmortem measurement of caffeine in bone marrow: Influence of sample location and correlation with blood concentration, in
Forensic Science International,
Volume 210, Issues 1–3, July 15, 2011, Pages 149-153).
When coffee is consumed it has a half-life in the body on the order of 6 hours (time for concentration to decrease by half). This means the amount remaining in the body decreases by half every 6 hours. So, for a 24-hour period, the concentration in the body after 6 hours would be roughly half of the concentration right after drinking a cup of coffee. In twelve hours it would be ½ of ½ or ¼ of the initial concentrations, after 18 hours it would be 1/8th (½ of ½ of ½) and after 24 hours approximately 1/16th would remain.
If Suzanne last consumed a cup of coffee on Saturday morning, the 9th and was killed before Sunday morning the 10th (as the prosecution asserts), at least 1/16 of that caffeine would still be in her body. In other words, the suggestion that detectable caffeine in her bone marrow proves she consumed coffee the morning of the 10th is false.
It must be acknowledged that the removal of caffeine from the body varies somewhat between individuals. But caffeine can be detected in bone marrow at very low concentrations (a few parts per billion) so that caffeine would still be “detectable” after many half-lives and long after coffee was consumed (way more than 24 hours).
So detectable caffeine in Suzanne’s bone marrow only indicates she consumed coffee prior to her death, nothing more. It is entirely consistent with her murder sometime after the last proof of life on the afternoon of the 9th, which is supported by a large amount of other evidence (phone records, social media, etc.).
As far as why a half cup of coffee with her DNA on it was in the kitchen on Mother’s Day, I offer a less exculpatory explanation – she simply left it there sometime on the 9th before her husband murdered her.
www.denverpost.com
