CO - BARRY ARRESTED AGAIN - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o prejudice* *found in 2023* #119

[Charlot123]

I would have thought Susannah would want her remains laid to rest with her deceased family members in Indiana.

I have a feeling that most of all, it would be important for Suzanne that her gravesite, in whatever memorable form, is visited by her loved one, her friends and mostly, by her two daughters. She hoped to have children so much, she had her girls and the way she organized her life, all she went through, was also for them.

 

[mrjitty]

Given the time table last time around, should we not be close to serious evidential hearings kicking in?

 

[sds71]

People’s Response Intervenors’ Motion Regarding Suzanne Morphew’s Remains:

Conclusion

In conclusion, what is before the Court is that the Defendant in a murder case authorized the release

of the murder victim’s remains, prior to pending motions litigation and jury trial, and paid to have them

cremated prior to disclosures of his experts’ opinions or court rulings on admissibility of scientific testing

regarding said remains.

To prevent this, law enforcement sought a court ordered and constitutionally valid search warrant,

ensuring the preservation of material evidence. To the extent that this could be construed to infringe upon

a right of the victims, it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.

Until the Intervenors cite to specific legal authority regarding this specific circumstance – the right

to compel prior to motions litigation and trial the release of a murder victim’s remains that constitute

material evidence in a case which were lawfully obtained pursuant to a search warrant – their motion

should be denied.

Wherefore, based on the above the People respectfully request that this Honorable Court deny the

Intervenors’ Motion and deny the Intervenors’ Motion for a Show Cause Hearing.

Dated March 04, 2026

Anne E Kelly

District Attorney

https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/Response_Redacted.pdf

 

[MassGuy]

Just as I suspected. This attempt to recover Suzanne's remains and cremate them wasn't made until almost two years after the release of Suzanne's body.

An attempt by Barry to destroy evidence.

 

[Megnut]

Just as I suspected. This attempt to recover Suzanne's remains and cremate them wasn't made until almost two years after the release of Suzanne's body.

An attempt by Barry to destroy evidence.

Which, of course, is nothing new.

Par for the course.

JMO

 

[K9Enzo]

Wow - if I read that correctly SM was scheduled to be cremated on Feb 20, 2026. The coroners office notified LE. IMO

 

[MassGuy]

From what I can gather, the state would have allowed Suzanne to be buried back in 2024, but would have been able to make the same move to prevent cremation.

Cremation is obviously irreversible, but burial preserves evidence.

 

[arielilane]

Friendly Reminder:
bbm

This matter is set on March 9, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. for a Status Conference.
Parties may appear virtually using Webex Conferencing.

https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2026-01/Omnibus%20Order.pdf

 

[MassGuy]

Update: knowing full well the optics of this are terrible and that this move by his daughter has no chance in hell of success, Barry’s attorneys have filed a response stating the following:

“Defendant takes no position on the matter.”

https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/2026-03-05%2010-10-07%20Response%20to%20Motion%20to%20Intervene%20and%20for%20Order%20to%20Show%20Cause%20and%20TRO%20.docx.pdf

 

[K9Enzo]

Update: knowing full well the optics of this are terrible and that this move by his daughter has no chance in hell of success, Barry’s attorneys have filed a response stating the following:

“Defendant takes no position on the matter.”

https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/2026-03-05%2010-10-07%20Response%20to%20Motion%20to%20Intervene%20and%20for%20Order%20to%20Show%20Cause%20and%20TRO%20.docx.pdf

BM signed cremation authorization Feb 2026. So he kind of has a position. IMO

 

[MassGuy]

BM signed cremation authorization Feb 2026. So he kind of has a position. IMO

LOL. Very good point.

What's interesting too is that the defense apparently did not do their own independent testing here, and had no intention of doing so.

 

[Megnut]

LOL. Very good point.

What's interesting too is that the defense apparently did not do their own independent testing here, and had no intention of doing so.

You called that from the start!

 

[mrjitty]

LOL. Very good point.

What's interesting too is that the defense apparently did not do their own independent testing here, and had no intention of doing so.

yes they cant do any testing or they might create unfavourable discoverable evidence

 

[MassGuy]

You called that from the start!

Yes, because defense testing would have confirmed the state's results, which would have been discoverable. It would destroy any argument that the state's lab was wrong.

This also applies to an independent pathologist or anthropologist.

Their entire strategy depends on ambiguity, like that degraded touch DNA in Suzanne's vehicle.

 

[Seattle1]

Just as I suspected. This attempt to recover Suzanne's remains and cremate them wasn't made until almost two years after the release of Suzanne's body.

An attempt by Barry to destroy evidence.

An attempt by Barry to pray on the People and the Court in the name of his manipulated minions!

Please, we can only hope that Judge Hopkins, for once, opens her eyes to Jane Fisher-Byrialsen's prior comments to MSM and discussion of the evidence with a Dutch podcaster, and sees the brazen eleventh-hour play by Team Barry for what it truly is! JMO

 

[Tragg]

Given the time table last time around, should we not be close to serious evidential hearings kicking in?

My inference from the absence of the discovery controversies that plagued Linda Stanley's prosecution team is that Kelly and Johnson invested substantially in document preparation and disclosure in advance of the arrest. They are also negotiating professionally as required by law, to resolve by agreement those discovery issues that can be resolved before motions are filed.

The judge will want to know the status of those negotiations and will ask if the parties will be ready to meet her deadline for filing dispositive motions. Soon we'll have a better sense of when the fireworks will start, if not what the issues will be.

MOO.

 

[waldojabba]

DA asks judge to deny request for Suzanne Morphew’s remains

Barry Morphew attempted to obtain and cremate dead wife’s remains before trial Prosecutors objected to a request from the daughters of Suzanne Morphew on Wednesday to turn over her remains as her husband awaits trial for her murder. 12th Judicial District Attorney Anne Kelly said in a motion...

www.denvergazette.com

 

[MassGuy]

An attempt by Barry to pray on the People and the Court in the name of his manipulated minions!

Please, we can only hope that Judge Hopkins, for once, opens her eyes to Jane Fisher-Byrialsen's prior comments to MSM and discussion of the evidence with a Dutch podcaster, and sees the brazen eleventh-hour play by Team Barry for what it truly is! JMO

I'm just hoping that Hopkins is more like Murphy than Lama.

He not only allowed the defense to get away with lies, but actually used them as the basis for his decisions!

 

[Seattle1]

Yes, because defense testing would have confirmed the state's results, which would have been discoverable. It would destroy any argument that the state's lab was wrong.

This also applies to an independent pathologist or anthropologist.

Their entire strategy depends on ambiguity, like that degraded touch DNA in Suzanne's vehicle.

More importantly, this would interfere with the defense strategy to taint the autopsy evidence, which, according to Jane Fisher-Byrialsen, the elected coroner and members of LE present during the autopsy, are corrupt agents who had reason to plant BAM evidence here as part of their continued attempt to frame Barry for the murder of Suzanne!

(Be reminded that in the federal civil suit, Team Barry outright accused Chaffee County Deputy Himschoot of “planting" a plastic needle cap in an empty dryer drum in the laundry room of the Morphew residence on May 19, 2020. In Himschoot's Motion to Dismiss, he provided that the Plaintiff’s Response argues that this “planted” evidence gave other Defendants a theory of prosecution to “latch onto.” However, Plaintiff’s allegations regarding the needle cap are insufficient to plead the first element of a malicious prosecution claim: that “(1) the defendant caused the plaintiff ’s continued confinement or prosecution).

Reference: Case No. 1:23-cv-01108-DDD-JPO Document 151 filed 04/26/24 USDC Colorado

 

[Seattle1]

I'm just hoping that Hopkins is more like Murphy than Lama.

He not only allowed the defense to get away with lies, but actually used them as the basis for his decisions!

IMO, we've not exactly seen that thus far-- and she's also failed to recognize SM's siblings as victims. In fact, Hopkins as much as told us (during the bond hearing) that she gives the M's support of BM much weight in her decisions!

And relative to the *MANDATORY PROTECTION ORDER PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-1-1001, C.R.S., IMO, a prudent justice (such as Murphy's example) would have named the M's in the Order with a notation that "Civil Contact Is Allowed."

Here, BM operated behind the scenes to request the release of SM's remains to a funeral home, and signed for her cremation, and ignored these facts when promoting the filing of an Intervenors Motion, is a perfect example of what can result when victims are not protected, pursuant to Statute, a defendant is treated as if he's above the law, and/or-- as if his criminal indictment was void of credible evidence against him! To my knowledge, Hopkins failed to name any individual(s) in the Mandatory Order, including the State's witnesses, all the while protecting the location of the defendant, who is simply known to be somewhere in the State of Colorado!

*These orders are distinct from civil protection orders as they are mandatory in criminal proceedings. Common conditions: prohibits harassing, molesting, intimidating, retaliating against, or tampering with any witness to or victim of the acts the defendant is charged with committing. Reference: Colo JDF 440

https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2024-04/JDF440.pdf