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

  • #601
Seattle1 said:
IMO, per the Sept 22, 2025 Defense Motion D-10, and Court Order Granting Changed Attorney Status D-10 dated Oct 8, 2025, I don't think there's been any change to Defense Attorneys Beller and Fisher-Byrialsen status, and they remain “Privately Retained Counsel.”

David M. Beller of Recht Kornfeld, P.C., and Jane Fisher-Byrialsen of Fisher &Byrialsen, PLLC, on behalf of Barry L. Morphew, and moves to change their status designation from “Alternate Defense Counsel” to “Privately Retained Counsel.” On today’s date, supporters of Mr. Morphew posted bond on his behalf. As such, Mr. Morphew will exhaust all resources and pay for his representation moving forward. Should his status change in the future, Mr. Morphew will comply with the requirements of Chief Justice Directive 04-04. CJD 04-04

However, I do believe the Defense Team is probably in need of additional help (i.e., a local attorney to handle more of the grunt work) as the case proceeds closer to Motion deadlines and trial prep, and the most recent Withdrawls/Motions/Orders linked below illustrate where Team Morphew went through the process to recognize the earlier conflict with the CO Public Defender's Office, first recognized on July 9, 2025, opening the way for the Court to grant the Motion and Order the appointment of additional Defense Counsel via the Office of ADC.

The Office of the Alternate Defense Counsel (ADC) was established pursuant to §21-2-101, C.R.S. (Senate Bill 96-205). The ADC is funded to provide representation for indigent persons in criminal and juvenile delinquency cases in which the Public Defender’s office determines that an ethical conflict of interest exists.

coloradoadc.org

About Us - Colorado ADC

Background The federal and state constitutions provide that an accused person has the right to be represented by counsel in criminal prosecutions. This constitutional right has been interpreted to mean […]
coloradoadc.org coloradoadc.org

Click to expand...
Hi @Seattle1, I am so glad you are here to help me sort this out. I was worried that the sneaky defendant was able to pick his own PD. Is there any chance that Section 1.c - CJD 04-04 provides such a loophole? From your response, maybe it's just funding for additional resources, and he must still pay the bulk of cost for private counsel. If I'm understanding it correctly.
"State funds are appropriated to the Office of Alternate Defense Counsel to provide for the representation of indigent persons in criminal cases in which the Public Defender declares a conflict of interest pursuant to §21-2-101, C.R.S. (2014)."

TIA!
 
  • #602
  • #603
  • #604
waldojabba said:
Here is Jaimie K's linked in page

She is Office Head at Colorado State Public Defender

IIRC BM is using David and Jane as his "public defenders" bc they agreed to it and no one else was "available" from the PD office ? BM is not paying them. Remember he is out of money. Maybe Jaimie was riding third chair for the D to make it look legit.

JK possibly read the briefs and decided she wanted no part of the charade and has a "conflict" - perhaps a moral conflict ? Just a thought imo/wink

The no money thing will be convenient when he also talks about how he had no money to have Suzanne's remains re examined independently bc you know he would have wanted that ( eye roll). Wondering if he pursued getting money from the justice fund or other such entity. His attorney's could have made the argument it was pivotal to establish his innocence... but imo they did not make any argument bc they know it does not benefit their client.

JMO
Click to expand...
EDIT TO ABOVE :

While he was in custody Barry's court fees were paid by the state - once bailed out he is paying privately as long as he and his supporters are "able" to pay.

From the link below
"Once Morphew is released from jail, he will begin paying for his own defense, said Beller. To this point, Morphew’s attorneys have been paid by the state, because a defendant is deemed indigent if they are in custody, Beller said."

“In Mr. Morphew’s case, between what little bit of assets he has as well as some supporters, he is going to be paying for his defense moving forward for as long as he and they are able to do so,” said Beller."

www.cpr.org

Barry Morphew supporters raise funds to free him while awaiting trial in wife’s death

Posting a $3 million bond in a first-degree murder case is unusual, but not unheard of. Morphew is expected to be released once he is fitted with a GPS monitor and finds a place in Colorado to live.
www.cpr.org www.cpr.org
 
  • #605
Seattle1 said:
IMO, per the Sept 22, 2025 Defense Motion D-10, and Court Order Granting Changed Attorney Status D-10 dated Oct 8, 2025, I don't think there's been any change to Defense Attorneys Beller and Fisher-Byrialsen status, and they remain “Privately Retained Counsel.”

David M. Beller of Recht Kornfeld, P.C., and Jane Fisher-Byrialsen of Fisher &Byrialsen, PLLC, on behalf of Barry L. Morphew, and moves to change their status designation from “Alternate Defense Counsel” to “Privately Retained Counsel.” On today’s date, supporters of Mr. Morphew posted bond on his behalf. As such, Mr. Morphew will exhaust all resources and pay for his representation moving forward. Should his status change in the future, Mr. Morphew will comply with the requirements of Chief Justice Directive 04-04. CJD 04-04

However, I do believe the Defense Team is probably in need of additional help (i.e., a local attorney to handle more of the grunt work) as the case proceeds closer to Motion deadlines and trial prep, and the most recent Withdrawls/Motions/Orders linked below illustrate where Team Morphew went through the process to recognize the earlier conflict with the CO Public Defender's Office, first recognized on July 9, 2025, opening the way for the Court to grant the Motion and Order the appointment of additional Defense Counsel via the Office of ADC.

The Office of the Alternate Defense Counsel (ADC) was established pursuant to §21-2-101, C.R.S. (Senate Bill 96-205). The ADC is funded to provide representation for indigent persons in criminal and juvenile delinquency cases in which the Public Defender’s office determines that an ethical conflict of interest exists.

coloradoadc.org

About Us - Colorado ADC

Background The federal and state constitutions provide that an accused person has the right to be represented by counsel in criminal prosecutions. This constitutional right has been interpreted to mean […]
coloradoadc.org coloradoadc.org

Click to expand...
-So as I now understand it :

-Jaimie K, who is a PD, had filed about a conflict of interest in July 9 2025 (doc missing) and on March 9 affirmed that the conflict still existed so a new public defender needs to be appointed for Morphew to help with the Morphew D.
So BM is currently paying for Jane and David but will not be paying for the new additional representation. That person will be paid thru Colo Public Defender

-Legal counsel for his adult daughters
Below is the linked in for Bert Nieslink -
Deputy Director
Alternate Defense Counsel
( The Office of the Alternate Defense Counsel (ADC) is a state agency that provides legal representation to individuals facing criminal charges who can’t afford a lawyer and the Office of the State Public Defender has a conflict of interest. For example, if the Public Defender represents someone else involved in the same case, the court appoints an ADC approved lawyer.)

So it appears the daughters are receiving free legal assistance in their quest to secure and cremate Sus's remains

I think I now have it straight ?? : )

 
Last edited:
  • #606
Niner said:
EU rules won't let me read this.... still 3/30 ?? or another date? TIA! :)
Click to expand...
Yes "In the March 9 status conference for the trial of Barry Morphew, another status conference was set for 1:30 p.m. March 30, in addition to a possible hearing regarding the release of the late Suzanne Morphew’s remains to her children, Macy and Mallory Morphew."
 
Last edited:
  • #607
waldojabba said:
Yes "In the March 9 status conference for the trial of Barry Morphew, another status conference was set for 1:30 p.m. March 30, in addition to a possible hearing regarding the release of the late Suzanne Morphew’s remains to her children, Macy and Mallory Morphew."
Click to expand...

Oh - okay - I thought the motion to intervene was set for 3/30 also. ??

from Seattle1's post #599
Seattle1 said:

People of the State of Colorado v Barry Morphew​


Hearing on Motion to Intervene: March 30, 2026 at 1:30 pm.
Click to expand...
 
  • #608
Wroitten by our friend Carol McK - who is supposedly retired - unless of course there may be a story that leans Barry.. any emphasis by me


"In a move that Bert Nieslanik — the Morphew daughters’ attorney — called “outrageous, cruel and shocking to the conscience,” case investigators removed their mother’s remains from Swan-Law Funeral Directors before her daughters could gather them for a memorial service, according to a court document.

The remains were released by the Chaffee County Coroner’s Office in April 2024 to the funeral home, where they had been stored for nearly two years, according to the court document.

However, before the daughters could retrieve them, the investigation “intervened and prevented them from retrieving them or burying them” without warning, the document stated.

The motion asking the judge to order the return of the remains claimed that law enforcement violated the Morphew daughters’ religious freedoms and their right to memorialize their mother “consistent with their faith.”

And there is lots more - have these people no shame ?

And this lawyer - did he just fall off turnip truck? gullible much? Def an eggregious miscarriage of justice literally whisking the Moms remains away after two years and their father rearrested - this totally would make Iris' eyeballs spin/s ... tell me this is not gonna be another S show circus ?

The two adult daughters had two years to cremate their dead Mother it only got urgent when BM was going to trial and the Mom's remains would be used to convict the killer, aka dear ole dad. Anybody have any "conman radar" out in Colo at all ?

www.denvergazette.com

Suzanne Morphew’s family fighting for her remains

Six years after she disappeared, Suzanne Morphew’s adult daughters are fighting to get her remains from the investigators who have them. Barry Morphew has been charged with first degree murder in his wife’s death. Mallory and Macy Morphew have asked a judge to order law enforcement to return...
www.denvergazette.com www.denvergazette.com
 
  • #609
Niner said:
Oh - okay - I thought the motion to intervene was set for 3/30 also. ??

from Seattle1's post #599
Click to expand...
yes here is a little more from the same article

"In the March 9 status conference for the trial of Barry Morphew, another status conference was set for 1:30 p.m. March 30, in addition to a possible hearing regarding the release of the late Suzanne Morphew’s remains to her children, Macy and Mallory Morphew.

Macy, Mallory and Barry Morphew all attended virtually and separately March 9.

The two adult children are asking 12th Judicial District Court Chief Judge Amanda Hopkins to order law enforcement to return their mothers’ remains after they were allegedly removed from a Colorado Springs funeral home.


During the March 9 status conference, Judge Hopkins said she is treating the request as three separate orders: a motion to intervene, a temporary protection order and an order to show cause. Hopkins added that she doesn’t know if the children have a legal standing to intervene, and if they don’t, the other two motions are moot"
 
  • #610
@Niner
here is the next part :

Roberta “Bert” Nieslanik, the attorney for the Morphew children, stated that she plans to drive to Alamosa for the March 30 hearing, but said the girls might attend virtually. She added that she will not need more than 30 minutes and does not plan on calling witnesses.

Anne Kelly, representing the 12th Judicial District, also online, said she doesn’t believe this request from the children warrants a hearing, and that once she responds to the filed motion, it might be resolved. She said this is an argument between the parties.

Kelly added that she would like more time to file her response to the motion, which Hopkins allowed. The DA has until 5 p.m. March 23 to respond.


www.themountainmail.com

Morphew status conference sets another, with possible hearing

In the trial of Barry Morphew, a hearing is set to discuss the release of his late wife's remains to their children. The court will consider the request.
www.themountainmail.com www.themountainmail.com
 
  • #611
Please tell me there has been, or will be, a full transparent and accurate evaluation of BM's finances prior to any public defense arrangement, including every penny he moved into other people's accounts.

JMO
 
  • #612
I have a solution.

Release the remains after BM, through Counsel, stipulates to the authenticity of the coroner's report.

They can't argue both for the remains to be returned and question the reliability of the coroner's report, which they cannot re-test due to destruction of remains.

They honestly need to stipulate that claiming her remains without additional testing is confirmation of the testing done.

JMO
 
Last edited:
  • #613
Seattle1 said:
Refresh of the Court Documents as of today:

People of the State of Colorado v Barry Morphew | Colorado Judicial Branch

www.coloradojudicial.gov www.coloradojudicial.gov

People of the State of Colorado v Barry Morphew​


Hearing on Motion to Intervene: March 30, 2026 at 1:30 pm.

You will not be able to join the Court's Webex room without prior permission from the Court.


Click to expand...
Thanks for posting. I almost missed the 7 page March 6 Intervenor's reply.
 
  • #614
Monty Ma said:
Thanks for posting. I almost missed the 7 page March 6 Intervenor's reply.
Click to expand...

Thank you for highlighting this reply. I needed to (re)read it.

Wow.

Representing that her remains were recovered for burial while distancing themselves from BM's (illegal) move to cremate her remains which they attempt to negate because, accused of her murder, he has no authority to sign the forms he did in fact sign.

I believe it's this move that the State has objected to. Burial of remains preserves evidence, 6 feet down. BM's 11th hour attempt to authorize cremation was what prompted the State to action.

We all know that, had her remains been cremated, BM's Defense team would then discredit all the testing that was done and "not verified" (by the testing they chose not to do, prior to cremation -- but they won't say that part).

This is BM ignoring the rules in order to serve himself.

I would like to remind the judge that this supporting father concealed, then buried Suzanne's remains, an act that denied her daughters the opportunity to give her "a proper burial". He did that will full awareness. And while these are only alleged crimes, and he remains innocent until proven guilty, we have proceeded into the process whereby we've passed the presumption great threshhold. Which means IMO the judge must weigh her rulings on the presumption that he could be found guilty and therefore he is responsible for the situation he's in and he may be controlling victims who are not actually free to exert their own wishes, apart from his.

I think she had a duty to investigate whether the victims are being victimized by the defendant lest they be victims of coercion, used by the defendant to do something he had no authority to do. His agenda.

Using victim-agents to destroy evidence.

I am reminded again that he is alleged to have concealed her remains at one location from which he recovered incomplete remains before burying her in a shallow grave, allowing for predation and scattering.

This is how much he cared about her remains and her daughters' right to receive her full remains and give her a proper burial.

That should stand first and foremost.

JMO
 
Last edited:
  • #615
BM's lawyers are spelling her name Malory too. I wonder if she changed her name?
 
  • #616
Megnut said:
I think she had a duty to investigate whether the victims are being victimized by the defendant lest they be victims of coercion, used by the defendant to do something he had no authority to do. His agenda.

Using victim-agents to destroy evidence.

I am reminded again that he is alleged to have concealed her remains at one location from which he recovered incomplete remains before burying her in a shallow grave, showing for predation and scattering.

This is how much he cared about her remains and her daughters' right to vision her full remains and give her a proper burial.

That should stand first and foremost.

JMO
Click to expand...
^^RSBM

Exactly, Judge Hopkins glazed over this requirement at her very first opportunity when she failed to name them on the mandatory PCO with a notation that "Civil Contact was allowed." This is the typical, unbiased action by the Courts.

Nope. Hopkins has been blinded by their "support" of BM as if some endorsement of his innocence, and continues to allow this (support) to weigh heavily on her decisions.

The world can see through the dishonest Motion by Intervenors--yet Hopkins can't!

Meanwhile, the other victims here (pursuant to Co VRA, i.e., SM's siblings) were given short shrift beginning with BM's initial hearing, and continue to be ignored by this Court. JMO
 
  • #617
Megnut said:
Thank you for highlighting this reply. I needed to (re)read it.

Wow.

Representing that her remains were recovered for burial while distancing themselves from BM's (illegal) move to cremate her remains which they attempt to negate because, accused of her murder, he has no authority to sign the forms he did in fact sign.

I believe it's this move that the State has objected to. Burial of remains preserves evidence, 6 feet down. BM's 11th hour attempt to authorize cremation was what prompted the State to action.

We all know that, had her remains been cremated, BM's Defense team would then discredit all the testing that was done and "not verified" (by the testing they chose not to do, prior to cremation -- but they won't say that part).

This is BM ignoring the rules in order to serve himself.

I would like to remind the judge that this supporting father concealed, then buried Suzanne's remains, an act that denied her daughters the opportunity to give her "a proper burial". He did that will full awareness. And while these are only alleged crimes, and he remains innocent until proven guilty, we have proceeded into the process whereby we've passed the presumption great threshhold. Which means IMO the judge must weigh her rulings on the presumption that he could be found guilty and therefore he is responsible for the situation he's in and he may be controlling victims who are not actually free to exert their own wishes, apart from his.

I think she had a duty to investigate whether the victims are being victimized by the defendant lest they be victims of coercion, used by the defendant to do something he had no authority to do. His agenda.

Using victim-agents to destroy evidence.

I am reminded again that he is alleged to have concealed her remains at one location from which he recovered incomplete remains before burying her in a shallow grave, allowing for predation and scattering.

This is how much he cared about her remains and her daughters' right to receive her full remains and give her a proper burial.

That should stand first and foremost.

JMO
Click to expand...

Intervenors' response is more rubbish!

Guess they forgot about their intent to 'scatter SM' in Florida!

JMO
 
  • #618
Niner said:
EU rules won't let me read this.... still 3/30 ?? or another date? TIA! :)
Click to expand...

In the March 9 status conference for the trial of Barry Morphew, another status conference was set for 1:30 p.m. March 30, in addition to a possible hearing regarding the release of the late Suzanne Morphew’s remains to her children, Macy and Mallory Morphew.
 
  • #619
Swan Lake or Swan-Law. Any relevance in a typo?
A Swan Song?

"Suzanne Morphew’s remains from Swan Lake Funeral Home in Colorado Springs, Colorado" (emphasis added)
From Feb 20, 2026 File Motion to Intervene.pdf by Susan Morphew's daughters,
https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/Motion to Intervene.pdf
"Then, on January 29, 2026, Defendant Barry Morphew signed for the release of Victim SuzanneMorphew’s remains from the El Paso Coroner’s Office to the Swan-Law Funeral Directors funeral home." (emphasis added)
From Mar 4, 2026 File Response_Redacted.pdf by the State.
https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/Response_Redacted.pdf

Per below, looks like the state got the name right.
From the Col Spgs. funeral home website:
"The name of Swan-Law Funeral Directors has been synonymous with high quality funerals in Colorado Springs for over a century..." (emphasis added)
swan-law-funeral-directors/2325?utm_source=google_my_business&utm_medium=organic (emphasis added)

(sorry if already mentioned/discussed)
 
  • #620
al66pine said:
Swan Lake or Swan-Law. Any relevance in a typo?
A Swan Song?

"Suzanne Morphew’s remains from Swan Lake Funeral Home in Colorado Springs, Colorado" (emphasis added)
From Feb 20, 2026 File Motion to Intervene.pdf by Susan Morphew's daughters,
https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/Motion to Intervene.pdf
"Then, on January 29, 2026, Defendant Barry Morphew signed for the release of Victim SuzanneMorphew’s remains from the El Paso Coroner’s Office to the Swan-Law Funeral Directors funeral home." (emphasis added)
From Mar 4, 2026 File Response_Redacted.pdf by the State.
https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/Response_Redacted.pdf

Per below, looks like the state got the name right.
From the Col Spgs. funeral home website:
"The name of Swan-Law Funeral Directors has been synonymous with high quality funerals in Colorado Springs for over a century..." (emphasis added)
swan-law-funeral-directors/2325?utm_source=google_my_business&utm_medium=organic (emphasis added)

(sorry if already mentioned/discussed)
Click to expand...
I live in Colorado Springs. It's Swan-Law. They've been around for many years. I toured them when I was in college years ago. They seem to be a part of Dignity Memorial now, must be some kind of conglomerate(???), I have no idea when that happened or if it's relevant.

(EBM, fixed the link, sorry)

Swan Lake must have been a typo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mysti88c
  • Locked
CO - BARRY ARRESTED AGAIN - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o prejudice* *found in 2023* #118
56 57 58
Replies
1,158
Views
79K
tricia
tricia
Mysti88c
  • Locked
Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #83
46 47 48
Replies
949
Views
92K
Tiff23fr
Tiff23fr
Mysti88c
  • Locked
Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #82
50 51 52
Replies
1,023
Views
103K
Seattle1
Seattle1
Mysti88c
  • Locked
Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #90
53 54 55
Replies
1,081
Views
90K
Tiff23fr
Tiff23fr
Mysti88c
  • Locked
Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #89
51 52 53
Replies
1,048
Views
87K
Tiff23fr
Tiff23fr

Guardians Monthly Goal

15 30 45 60 75
Our goal for the month is 75 new Guardians members to sign up. Have you been thinking about becoming a member? Click here to find out how!

Members online

... and 131 more.
Total: 1,594 (members: 132, guests: 1,462)

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
1,462
Total visitors
1,594
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
647,012
Messages
18,869,465
Members
246,188
Latest member
know_carrow21

Community Rules

  1. Be Civil
    Treat all members with respect. No personal attacks, harassment, or inflammatory language.
  2. Victim Friendly
    Always show respect for victims and their families. No victim blaming or insensitive speculation.
  3. Fact-based Sourcing
    Provide credible sources for claims. Distinguish between verified facts and personal theories.
  4. Social Media Use
    Do not post direct links to personal social media profiles of private individuals.
  5. Copyright and Paywalls
    Do not copy full articles. Summarize and link to the original source instead.
  6. Privacy and Personal Information
    Do not post personal information such as addresses, phone numbers, or workplaces.
  7. Registered Sex-Offenders
    Do not name or speculate about RSOs unless officially named in connection to a case.
  8. Stay On Topic
    Keep discussions relevant to the case or topic at hand. Avoid off-topic tangents.
  9. Accounts, Moderation, and Disputes
    One account per person. Contact moderators privately for disputes or concerns.
  10. Solicitation and Fundraising
    No solicitation, fundraising, or promotion of personal ventures without approval.
Top