Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 #100 *Case dismissed w/o Prejudice*

[Boxer]

So should the defendant go free since he can hire the best? Even if he murdered his wife?
I think I know your answer.

Hard to answer

This unfairness is why the DP is off the table so many places.
It is obvious to almost everyone you don't get the DP if you are rich.

 

[justtrish]

So how is there to be no mention of Mr. Morphew (insert eyeroll here) liking to hunt, when he mentions it so many times to explain away his actions. I mean HE made it such a central point and now they want that to be excluded... please.

That is a fact in this case. HE hunts, matter of fact he said that was all he had left (did he forget about his daughters when he said that?) I just don't get it, how can they play the interviews in their entirety and yet NOT have the jury know he hunts. That is who he is and for most that hunt, they do it ethically and would NEVER kill their spouse or anyone for that matter. The only reason it's a problem for him now is because he had all this incriminating evidence and statements centered around him hunting, shooting chipmunks, tranquilizing deer, chasing elk, searching for a week old turkey carcass.. I mean he had so many critters coming at him on a daily basis, it's absolutely unbelievable.. oh wait.. well gee now we see why this is such an issue for ole Mr. Morphew.

He made his bed... or actually Suzanne did and then he never slept in it again. Poor poor Barry, the jury must not know this stuff because it might make them actually believe he killed his wife.

 

[Cindizzi]

So how is there to be no mention of Mr. Morphew (insert eyeroll here) liking to hunt, when he mentions it so many times to explain away his actions. I mean HE made it such a central point and now they want that to be excluded... please.

That is a fact in this case. HE hunts, matter of fact he said that was all he had left (did he forget about his daughters when he said that?) I just don't get it, how can they play the interviews in their entirety and yet NOT have the jury know he hunts. That is who he is and for most that hunt, they do it ethically and would NEVER kill their spouse or anyone for that matter. The only reason it's a problem for him now is because he had all this incriminating evidence and statements centered around him hunting, shooting chipmunks, tranquilizing deer, chasing elk, searching for a week old turkey carcass.. I mean he had so many critters coming at him on a daily basis, it's absolutely unbelievable.. oh wait.. well gee now we see why this is such an issue for ole Mr. Morphew.

He made his bed... or actually Suzanne did and then he never slept in it again. Poor poor Barry, the jury must not know this stuff because it might make them actually believe he killed his wife.

Very good point.
I’m just going to call him Mister Man from now on.
Reminds me of one of my favorite Stephen King movies—
Misery.
JMO

 

[Love Never Fails]

How about the prosecution not refer to him as a suspect or Barry or Morphew. How about they call him just what he is? The murderer.

 

[Murphy1950]

Hypothetical question for discussion- How does a judge decide whether to punish the prosecution for something he even says was not willful if it ruins the chance of justice for the victim?

RSBM

Does it make any sense to have “quasi-professional” mini grand jury, say 3 people, to hear and decide on the motions and not the judge? Unamious to suppress otherwise it stays. I would trust that more and it doesn’t strike me as punitive. They could also decide at any point the case can be dropped until they reorganize and meanwhile the defendant is free.

That might be true.
However MOO there is precedence of digital data being as powerful evidence as DNA.
MOO that point needs to be taken up courts if need be
I mapped out the location of BM's phone pings upon arriving home Saturday.
There is no ambiguity about it, nor any "walking through walls."
It is a simple path around and through the house at the speed of a medium run.

At the beginning of this case, I struggled with what seemed to be all digital/electronic evidence...beeps, pings, telematics, texts etc. I wondered if I could convict someone of anything (not necessarily murder) based on pings, beeps and telematics. I am minimally technical savvy; I wasn’t from the generation raised on devices.

Fingerprints followed by DNA in the late 80’s (which was an explosive discovery for trials) along with CCTV type evidence.

We now at the age of CODIS and electronic/digital pings, beeps, and telematics leading the way. I can’t believe how much questionable activity is caught by the general public just on cell phones and “ring” doorbell systems, not to mention body cams. I didn’t know spy pens existed until Barry’s PH.

If I am understanding this Defense team correctly, they would want everyone to believe that all digital/electronic evidence is unreliable. A couple of different electronic sources, with complimentary, synchronized hits, tell the story and I find it believable. I find it more reliable than eyewitness testimony.

Per electronic evidence the “husband” was where the bike was found, a path the wife didn’t ride. The “husband” was where the helmet was found. Suzanne's phone went dead for all purposes around 4 am. Electronics coupled with his own words...."
Barry talks about the county road where the helmet was found and said he was pretty sure he went past that one, because he was stilling looking at the herd."



That's about all I need, unless there is legitimate exculpatory evidence to explore, I'd be more than willing to listen to it.

 

[Cindizzi]

I’m trying to picture what the Prosecution CAN use if the Defense gets their way.

My first thought is the staged bike scene. Although some of the LE Officers cannot testify as experts, they can still just read from their reports how it didn’t appear to be an accident or abduction, right?

Then I thought about what the Defense has NOT asked to be excluded.. and I thought about the trash runs. But I guess those would fall under “ forensic evidence such as cell phone and Telematics “. ?
But still, they have surveillance photos of him at those trash cans.
And they have surveillance photos at the Holiday Inn.

Also as far as his alibi, they have LE interviews where he said he was at the job site with workers present when he got the call that she was missing. And he told witnesses the same lie. The Defense can’t suppress that, can they?
MG and JP can dispute that.

The Defense can claim all day long that there is no proof that SM is dead, but it’s only logical that that’s not true.

The Defense can ask that the Prosecution not tell the Jury to put the puzzle pieces together but they CANNOT ask the Jurors to leave their common sense at the door.

Maybe I’m grasping, but I’m hoping that the State’s case has not been hogtied.
JMO

 

[waldojabba]

Sure and that needs to be the DAs openimg statement.

The defense will muddy waters and throw mud.
But the facts will show ...

Let’s call it what it is - Blatant Misrepresentation- by the defense, from the jump, on a number of issues. And yes the Prosecution needs to call them out every time on every issue. It’s like swatting flies with those lawyers.
The problem I see is judge #2 does not appear as well informed as judge#1 was with all the nuance and details. Even when the Prosecution objects and their arguments are accurate he seems to favor the Defense.
It will be interesting when this gets to court and the jury is in place. The contrast in style between the DA LS and IE is like oil and water. The judge seemingly so far seems to personally identify with the Defense. Will the jury personally identify with DA LS ?

 

[waldojabba]

How about the prosecution not refer to him as a suspect or Barry or Morphew. How about they call him just what he is? The murderer.

Perfect

 

[Love Never Fails]

Let’s call it what it is - Blatant Misrepresentation- by the defense, from the jump, on a number of issues. And yes the Prosecution needs to call them out every time on every issue. It’s like swatting flies with those lawyers.
The problem I see is judge #2 does not appear as well informed as judge#1 was with all the nuance and details. Even when the Prosecution objects and their arguments are accurate he seems to favors the Defense.
It will be interesting when this gets to court and the jury is in place. The contrast in style between the DA LS and IE is like oil and water. The judge seemingly so far seems to personally identify with the Defense. Will the jury personally identify with DA LS ?

Just what is DA Linda Stanley’s “style”. I haven’t seen her or heard any journalist say she has been in the courtroom thus far.

 

[Love Never Fails]

RSBM

Does it make any sense to have “quasi-professional” mini grand jury, say 3 people, to hear and decide on the motions and not the judge? Unamious to suppress otherwise it stays. I would trust that more and it doesn’t strike me as punitive. They could also decide at any point the case can be dropped until they reorganize and meanwhile the defendant is free.



At the beginning of this case, I struggled with what seemed to be all digital/electronic evidence...beeps, pings, telematics, texts etc. I wondered if I could convict someone of anything (not necessarily murder) based on pings, beeps and telematics. I am minimally technical savvy; I wasn’t from the generation raised on devices.

Fingerprints followed by DNA in the late 80’s (which was an explosive discovery for trials) along with CCTV type evidence.

We now at the age of CODIS and electronic/digital pings, beeps, and telematics leading the way. I can’t believe how much questionable activity is caught by the general public just on cell phones and “ring” doorbell systems, not to mention body cams. I didn’t know spy pens existed until Barry’s PH.

If I am understanding this Defense team correctly, they would want everyone to believe that all digital/electronic evidence is unreliable. A couple of different electronic sources, with complimentary, synchronized hits, tell the story and I find it believable. I find it more reliable than eyewitness testimony.

Per electronic evidence the “husband” was where the bike was found, a path the wife didn’t ride. The “husband” was where the helmet was found. Suzanne's phone went dead for all purposes around 4 am.

That's about all I need, unless there is legitimate exculpatory evidence to explore, I'd be more than willing to listen to it.

Murphy I’m with you. If I could hear both sides as a juror and know he was running around his yard on Saturday afternoon and the phone pings place him there, I’m voting guilty. Because he was chasing Suzanne.

We already know he called her like 11 times on his way home. That would make a controlling person like him so angry!

 

[waldojabba]

Just what is DA Linda Stanley’s “style”. I haven’t seen her or heard any journalist say she has been in the courtroom thus far.

My perception off the cuff - You can probably find DA LS down at the vfw on sat night - juke box and long neck bottles, guns and motorcycles. IE ? More than likely at the grill room sipping the cocktail “du jour” at the “club” bmw’s and 200 hair cuts. Stark difference. Totally all my assumption only. IMO

 

[Cindizzi]

Let’s call it what it is - Blatant Misrepresentation- by the defense, from the jump, on a number of issues. And yes the Prosecution needs to call them out every time on every issue. It’s like swatting flies with those lawyers.
The problem I see is judge #2 does not appear as well informed as judge#1 was with all the nuance and details. Even when the Prosecution objects and their arguments are accurate he seems to favor the Defense.
It will be interesting when this gets to court and the jury is in place. The contrast in style between the DA LS and IE is like oil and water. The judge seemingly so far seems to personally identify with the Defense. Will the jury personally identify with DA LS ?

Thanks for asking what the Jury might identify with.
I’m just guessing but I would bet big money that this high powered Defense team has a Jury Expert on board.
Some things I think they will look for are:

Although they don’t want any mention of BM’s hunting skills, they will probably look for Jurors who are long time hunters who would take offense at someone saying that because they hunt animals they would kill a human.

The Prosecution had filed a Motion to strike a Defense witness who apparently makes a living by testifying about “ false confessions and the Reid method “. For example BM could never say what his last vision of SM was until Grusing suggested it was “ a lump “ and then later he repeated it. The Defense will look for Jurors who do not trust the Police. IMO
An Example of what Dr. Richard Leo says when he testifies on the issue of false confessions | John E. Reid and Associates, Inc.

The Prosecution has filed a Motion to strike a “ Medical Expert “ who basically will testify to what Prescriptions SM was taking. IMO the Defense will look for Jurors who have family members who are affected by RX meds.

jmo

 

[jakat]

My perception off the cuff - You can probably find DA LS down at the vfw on sat night - juke box and long neck bottles, guns and motorcycles. IE ? More than likely at the grill room sipping the cocktail “du jour” at the “club” bmw’s and 200 hair cuts. Stark difference. Totally all my assumption only. IMO

Your assumption seems accurate.

 

[Boxer]

My perception off the cuff - You can probably find DA LS down at the vfw on sat night - juke box and long neck bottles, guns and motorcycles. IE ? More than likely at the grill room sipping the cocktail “du jour” at the “club” bmw’s and 200 hair cuts. Stark difference. Totally all my assumption only. IMO

Probably mainly true, but IMO the reality is one of them or maybe both of them are working on cases Saturday night.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Your question, this is a big problem for me. I feel so disgusted by what’s happening I am struggling to stay with it

Thank you. I couldn't quite put it into words but you did perfectly.

 

[Cindizzi]

Abracadabra???

@MassGuy sbm. Thanks for your post.
This vid ^ says "Subtitles/closed captions unavailable."

Do I need to change a setting on my tablet, hire a wizard to cast a magic spell, or ??? Anyone? TiA

Looks like captions are working now!

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

My perception off the cuff - You can probably find DA LS down at the vfw on sat night - juke box and long neck bottles, guns and motorcycles. IE ? More than likely at the grill room sipping the cocktail “du jour” at the “club” bmw’s and 200 hair cuts. Stark difference. Totally all my assumption only. IMO

Based on demographics of Fremont County and Cañon City, the Fremont County registered voters will not have an affinity for Iris and Dru. This area of Colorado is undereducated and economically dispossessed. The citizens are more likely to be pro-law enforcement, with DoC being the area’s largest employer. IMO

 

[steeltowngirl]

Finally catching up here. Just wow.

If I didn’t know better, I’d think Salida was a suburb of Denmark. Something is definitely rotten.

 

[Kristin Esq.]

I absolutely agree with the right to representation and the premise that you are considered innocent unless and until you are proven guilty.
However, my point was if you know you are defending someone who is guilty of an atrocious crime yet you do all in your power to get them off, you are not considering justice for the victim.
ETA I think a good defense attorney must be able to compartmentalize; to separate out his feelings for the victim versus the obligation to defend a guilty client. I hope the high powered money grabbing ones who defend with smoke and mirrors, SODDI hints, and unsubstantiated claims are left with a sick feeling in the pit of their stomach when a murderer goes free.
I also hope the defense attorneys who are able to free a wrongly accused client are able to rejoice in the American justice system.

If they don't do everything they can, then they run the risk of an appeal for ineffective assistance of counsel.

 

[OldCop]

For our reference during motions and trial:
https://www.hmichaelsteinberg.com/files/the-colorado-rules-of-evidence.pdf

and perhaps we should get a copy of this for our prosecutor(s):
https://www.amazon.com/Colorado-Evidence-Objections-Evidentiary-Foundations/dp/B092412674