CO - BARRY ARRESTED AGAIN - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o prejudice* *found in 2023* #118

[girlhasnoname]

Not on the witness list in 2021, but we also know BM didn't take a polygraph-- he just told others he did because he's a liar.

Yep, lying liars gonna lie.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Yes - next status conference hearing on 9/2/25 @ 1:30pm MT for murder case. And the civil case has a oral arguments hearing on 9/11/25 @ 8:30am.

Thanks Niner.

 

[Cindizzi]

I still have a subscription and get emails from the Mountain Mail and this story was in there today. Thought I would share it here even though the former DA, LS has nothing to do with the new charges moving forward.

[…]

Stanley never responded to the default judgment. Because Stanley owes the 11th Judicial District Attorney’s Office money, written interrogatories, which are required of a debtor, were served May 21 by a process server. Many people in the region had speculated whether Stanley had skipped town or was still living in her cabin in Guffy. According to the Affidavit of Service filed with the process server, Stanley was located at her home in Guffey.


She had 21 days to respond to the interrogatories but did not respond.

[…]

The Tribune will report if Stanley responds to the show-cause hearing in court on Aug. 4.

Former DA Linda Stanley faces the possibility of arrest for contempt of court

Former 11th Judicial District Attorney Linda Stanley made a career as an attorney failing to file paperwork with the courts.

www.themountainmail.com

 

[K9Enzo]

I still have a subscription and get emails from the Mountain Mail and this story was in there today. Thought I would share it here even though the former DA, LS has nothing to do with the new charges moving forward.

[…]

Stanley never responded to the default judgment. Because Stanley owes the 11th Judicial District Attorney’s Office money, written interrogatories, which are required of a debtor, were served May 21 by a process server. Many people in the region had speculated whether Stanley had skipped town or was still living in her cabin in Guffy. According to the Affidavit of Service filed with the process server, Stanley was located at her home in Guffey.


She had 21 days to respond to the interrogatories but did not respond.

[…]

The Tribune will report if Stanley responds to the show-cause hearing in court on Aug. 4.

Former DA Linda Stanley faces the possibility of arrest for contempt of court

Former 11th Judicial District Attorney Linda Stanley made a career as an attorney failing to file paperwork with the courts.

www.themountainmail.com

Welp, this is my favorite picture of her.

 

[Seattle1]

I still have a subscription and get emails from the Mountain Mail and this story was in there today. Thought I would share it here even though the former DA, LS has nothing to do with the new charges moving forward.

[…]

Stanley never responded to the default judgment. Because Stanley owes the 11th Judicial District Attorney’s Office money, written interrogatories, which are required of a debtor, were served May 21 by a process server. Many people in the region had speculated whether Stanley had skipped town or was still living in her cabin in Guffy. According to the Affidavit of Service filed with the process server, Stanley was located at her home in Guffey.


She had 21 days to respond to the interrogatories but did not respond.

[…]

The Tribune will report if Stanley responds to the show-cause hearing in court on Aug. 4.

Former DA Linda Stanley faces the possibility of arrest for contempt of court

Former 11th Judicial District Attorney Linda Stanley made a career as an attorney failing to file paperwork with the courts.

www.themountainmail.com

I've been waiting for MM or CR to report on the date LS's appeal/Opinion published.

I dunno... how much sense does it make to strip LS of her livelihood, and then double the actual costs legally spent at the time on her defense, as damages? This triple hit seems malicious to me. And if her appeal against the OARC is successful, I don't think the judgment is legal. Perhaps that's the idea here-- two specific counties (i.e., county commissioners) racing the clock! MOO

 

[Seattle1]

Some activity on the civil suit-- Appellate Court Docket (reference the Media Thread).

Team BM alone was scheduled for Oral Argument on 9/11/25 (no appellees/defendants requested an oral argument).

On 7/22/25-- Team BM filed an unopposed Motion (DOC-90) to vacate their oral argument, and requested the Court decide the case on the briefs submitted. They further stated they believed the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the briefs, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument!

Almost as an afterthought, team BM told the Court that the State of Colorado had recently re-filed criminal charges against BM -- the same murder charge, brought in the affidavit and prosecution that was the subject of the appeal. Citing ethical responsibilities, they thought it would be imprudent for them to make any oral statements.

^^This from the powerhouse attorneys BM spent his life savings on--including Jane FB.

On 7/28/25-- in response to the unopposed Motion by BM, the Court was compelled to Order (DOC-91) that in light of the refiling of criminal charges, they directed the parties to file supplemental briefs by 8/4/25, addressing the following questions:

1. Does the refiling of criminal charges impact the issues raised in this appeal such that the appeal should be abated until the criminal case is resolved?

2. If this court decides to proceed with argument in this appeal, what special measures relating to the conduct of oral argument, if any, should the court adopt?

Given this was probably the most arrogant appeal I've ever read in my life, essentially asking the Court to ignore existing laws as if they don't apply to BM, I can't tell you how happy I was to see a response from the Court-- Ordering a supplemental brief where BM wasn't allowed to slither away from abusing the process and wasting the Court's time. JMO

The initial civil suit dismissed by the US District Court failed as a matter of law, and there was no legal basis to file the appeal.

“The burden is on the plaintiff to frame a ‘complaint with enough factual matter (taken as true) to suggest’ that he or she is entitled to relief.” A court will “disregard conclusory statements and look only to whether the remaining, factual allegations plausibly suggest the defendant is liable.” At this stage, the well-pleaded facts underlying a plaintiff’s allegations must articulate a viable legal claim. (Ref. Order granting motions to dismiss - citations omitted).

 

[TIGER0822]

Yep, lying liars gonna lie.

Lying about taking a lie detector! That is classic BM! IMO

 

[Tragg]

Some activity on the civil suit-- Appellate Court Docket (reference the Media Thread).

Team BM alone was scheduled for Oral Argument on 9/11/25 (no appellees/defendants requested an oral argument).

On 7/22/25-- Team BM filed an unopposed Motion (DOC-90) to vacate their oral argument, and requested the Court decide the case on the briefs submitted. They further stated they believed the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the briefs, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument!

Almost as an afterthought, team BM told the Court that the State of Colorado had recently re-filed criminal charges against BM -- the same murder charge, brought in the affidavit and prosecution that was the subject of the appeal. Citing ethical responsibilities, they thought it would be imprudent for them to make any oral statements.

^^This from the powerhouse attorneys BM spent his life savings on--including Jane FB.

On 7/28/25-- in response to the unopposed Motion by BM, the Court was compelled to Order (DOC-91) that in light of the refiling of criminal charges, they directed the parties to file supplemental briefs by 8/4/25, addressing the following questions:

1. Does the refiling of criminal charges impact the issues raised in this appeal such that the appeal should be abated until the criminal case is resolved?

2. If this court decides to proceed with argument in this appeal, what special measures relating to the conduct of oral argument, if any, should the court adopt?

Given this was probably the most arrogant appeal I've ever read in my life, essentially asking the Court to ignore existing laws as if they don't apply to BM, I can't tell you how happy I was to see a response from the Court-- Ordering a supplemental brief where BM wasn't allowed to slither away from abusing the process and wasting the Court's time. JMO

The initial civil suit dismissed by the US District Court failed as a matter of law, and there was no legal basis to file the appeal.

“The burden is on the plaintiff to frame a ‘complaint with enough factual matter (taken as true) to suggest’ that he or she is entitled to relief.” A court will “disregard conclusory statements and look only to whether the remaining, factual allegations plausibly suggest the defendant is liable.” At this stage, the well-pleaded facts underlying a plaintiff’s allegations must articulate a viable legal claim. (Ref. Order granting motions to dismiss - citations omitted).

Thanks for this! I find it so interesting that it was the Court - not Morphew - who raised the issue of abatement. Has team Morphew written off the civil claim as a lost cause, not worth further effort?

My guess is that Morphew's attorneys will claim it is impossible to make oral argument about the past arrest and prosecution without compromising his defense of the current argument, even with "special measures" whatever that means.

Since the Court has introduced the idea of abatement, it makes sense for Morphew to suggest that course of action.

It may seem arrogant to ask a lower court to flat out ignore past precedent, but IMO that's what Morphew has had to do. I have always seen this case as an effort to change the Supreme Court's mind about immunity, and you have to make your arguments to the lower courts in order to get there. Such cases are unlikely to draw sanctions for being legally groundless IMO.

That said, I couldn't see Morphew's case interesting the Supreme Court - even before his second arrest.

 

[Seattle1]

Thanks for this! I find it so interesting that it was the Court - not Morphew - who raised the issue of abatement. Has team Morphew written off the civil claim as a lost cause, not worth further effort?

My guess is that Morphew's attorneys will claim it is impossible to make oral argument about the past arrest and prosecution without compromising his defense of the current argument, even with "special measures" whatever that means.

Since the Court has introduced the idea of abatement, it makes sense for Morphew to suggest that course of action.

It may seem arrogant to ask a lower court to flat out ignore past precedent, but IMO that's what Morphew has had to do. I have always seen this case as an effort to change the Supreme Court's mind about immunity, and you have to make your arguments to the lower courts in order to get there. Such cases are unlikely to draw sanctions for being legally groundless IMO.

That said, I couldn't see Morphew's case interesting the Supreme Court - even before his second arrest.

I'm sure the Appellees would have contested any further delay here! Perhaps Morphew left it alone for the sake of an uncontested Motion. We won't have to wait long for the response by the parties -- due date is Monday.

 

[Love Never Fails]

I'm sure the Appellees would have contested any further delay here! Perhaps Morphew left it alone for the sake of an uncontested Motion. We won't have to wait long for the response by the parties -- due date is Monday.

Time has been flying by this year. I know Barry has to be looking forward to prison soon.

I am looking forward to hearing a jury say “Guilty”.

 

[Charlot123]

Lying about taking a lie detector! That is classic BM! IMO

On the other hand, good that he refused (and lied).

I personally don’t believe in any validity of the polygraph. As such, I assume that a guilty person might totally “beat” it and an innocent one, fail.

So, imagine BM taking and passing it. While inadmissible in court, it would be such a star point for Iris!

On the other hand, Barry refusing it and then lying that he took it, while in itself not the proof of guilt, is priceless!

 

[TIGER0822]

I've been waiting for MM or CR to report on the date LS's appeal/Opinion published.

I dunno... how much sense does it make to strip LS of her livelihood, and then double the actual costs legally spent at the time on her defense, as damages? This triple hit seems malicious to me. And if her appeal against the OARC is successful, I don't think the judgment is legal. Perhaps that's the idea here-- two specific counties (i.e., county commissioners) racing the clock! MOO

LS work was a disaster, she was also malicious trying to digging up dirt on a judge. She deserves what is being thrown at her.

 

[Tragg]

I still have a subscription and get emails from the Mountain Mail and this story was in there today. Thought I would share it here even though the former DA, LS has nothing to do with the new charges moving forward.

[…]

Stanley never responded to the default judgment. Because Stanley owes the 11th Judicial District Attorney’s Office money, written interrogatories, which are required of a debtor, were served May 21 by a process server. Many people in the region had speculated whether Stanley had skipped town or was still living in her cabin in Guffy. According to the Affidavit of Service filed with the process server, Stanley was located at her home in Guffey.


She had 21 days to respond to the interrogatories but did not respond.

[…]

The Tribune will report if Stanley responds to the show-cause hearing in court on Aug. 4.

Former DA Linda Stanley faces the possibility of arrest for contempt of court

Former 11th Judicial District Attorney Linda Stanley made a career as an attorney failing to file paperwork with the courts.

www.themountainmail.com

Arkansas Valley Voice covered the latest development in the Counties' civil suit against Stanley:

Linda Stanley Responds in Writing Rather than in Person to Court Date

In a written statement filed with the court, according to the article Stanley claims:

She was not served properly
The DA expense statute allows expenses for defense to be allocated with funds from the DA budget
There was no fraud as alleged
There is no justification for treble damages
The judgment fails to follow well-established case law on the subject
Two of the four county attorneys have no standing to sue for reimbursement of tax dollars
The case is “not ripe”, and therefore, no judgment can be entered

I haven't seen the document so I can't really comment. I'm guessing that she'd like to keep the case open until the Colorado Supreme Court decides her appeal of the disbarment order. @Seattle1 may be right - she thinks the civil theft claims will be dismissed if the CSC orders her reinstated.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Nothing makes me happier than thinking of BM sitting in cage for the rest of his life but...

I have a feeling the Defense will push hard for Murder in the 2nd, Voluntary or Involuntary Manslaughter (act of passion) as an Option for the jury if he is found guilty. IF BM is found guilty on the lesser charges, he might not serve the rest of his natural life in prison.

I'm not sure what CO laws are regarding these sentencing guidelines and if they have to serve 100% of time ordered by the Judge. I've seen murderers sentenced 25 to life and released much earlier in other cases.

That would be such a miscarriage of justice for Suzanne.

IMO

 

[Seattle1]

Nothing makes me happier than thinking of BM sitting in cage for the rest of his life but...

I have a feeling the Defense will push hard for Murder in the 2nd, Voluntary or Involuntary Manslaughter (act of passion) as an Option for the jury if he is found guilty. IF BM is found guilty on the lesser charges, he might not serve the rest of his natural life in prison.

I'm not sure what CO laws are regarding these sentencing guidelines and if they have to serve 100% of time ordered by the Judge. I've seen murderers sentenced 25 to life and released much earlier in other cases.

That would be such a miscarriage of justice for Suzanne.

IMO

I have to think the jabbing of your wife with an animal tranquilizer would not fall softly on the heart and mind of the Judge who administers the penalty of the convicted defendant in Colorado. Also, the first-degree murder charge was by a grand jury indictment so I don't see the charge being dropped down to manslaughter here. JMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I have to think the jabbing of your wife with an animal tranquilizer would not fall softly on the heart and mind of the Judge who administers the penalty of the convicted defendant in Colorado. Also, the first-degree murder charge was by a grand jury indictment so I don't see the charge being dropped down to manslaughter here. JMO.

From your finger tips to God's ear friend.

 

[GOBliaison]

Oddly specific but probably easily pinpointed. He cut their day of work short, then drove MG back to her own vehicle. The conversation occurred during that short drive iirc so MG could timestamp it without difficulty IMO.

JMO

Exactly. And, building on this, I posted back then that this was ancillary to his imminent dispatching of Suzanne.
Why did I know this?
Because Barry knew that LE would straight away interview all of his employees. So blazingly clever: How about this 'meth head' MG sending them off over the wilderness inventorying abandoned mine shafts as she tells them about my body disposal boasting? That should keep those rubes wasting time far away from my South Branch Aquamation site...

Regrettably, both Barry and I were right.

 

[Tragg]

In Morphew's civil case, the court has cancelled oral arguments and deemed the case submitted, advancing by a month the time we can expect a decision.


08/08/2025 [11204000] Order filed by Clerk of the Court - Upon careful consideration of the briefs and the record filed in this appeal, including the parties’ supplemental briefing filed in response to this court’s July 28, 2025 order, the three judges to whom this case is assigned are unanimously of the opinion that oral argument is not needed. Therefore, the court orders this matter submitted for disposition on the briefs pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). All counsel scheduled to appear are excused from attendance at oral argument on September 11, 2025 in Denver, Colorado. Served on 08/08/2025.

 

[TIGER0822]

I still do not understand why the body was allegedly moved. The verdict may come down to this unknown.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I still do not understand why the body was allegedly moved. The verdict may come down to this unknown.

It seems to me the only reason he'd move her body, is if he felt she wasn't concealed well enough where she was.

Also, it's not alleged. The ME tests revealed evidence that where her remains were located is not where she decomposed.