Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #85

[Cindizzi]

^^bbm

Exactly! And my position from the first day this intention to sue for civil damages hit the news was that BM was not damaged here whatsoever given that due to the partial DNA evidence linked to a SA case in another state, the Judge ruled that the state failed to meet the standard for PEPG, and BM was granted bail after bound over for trial for first-degree murder (i.e., capital murder).

Exactly! Here is what Judge Murphy said :


He pointed out that “I find the evidence and presence of unknown DNA in the glove box of her car, and that this person has committed other sexual assaults to be important.” He noted that the DNA found is linked to three other sexual assaults; two in Arizona and one in Chicago.

“This is particularly significant – it’ doesn’t prove that he is innocent, or that someone else did it. Therefore: “proof is not evident, nor is the presumption great. Because I have found the prosecution has not met their burden, the court is obligated by the Colorado Constitution to set bail.”

Suzanne Morphew Murder to Proceed to Trial, Barry Morphew Bail set at $500,000 - by Jan Wondra - Ark Valley Voice

 

[Cindizzi]

#JusticeForSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome

Memorial tree going up in Salida to honor missing woman Suzanne Morphew

SALIDA, Colo.– The Salida community is putting together another memorial tree for missing Chaffee County woman Suzanne Morphew in Riverside Park during the annual Christmas Tree decorating.

In 2020, a local hair salon did a similar act of remembrance with over 200 ornaments on the tree in Morphew’s memory.


This year’s decoration theme is Polar Express as well as yellow and teal as a color scheme. If anyone wants to send an ornament in to be hung on the tree, you are asked to do so prior to November 15.

Items should be sent to Wild Horses Salon located at 733 Blake Street, Salida, CO, 81201.

The tree will be decorated on Nov. 21 and lit the Friday after Thanksgiving.

 

[Seattle1]

“This is particularly significant – it’ doesn’t prove that he is innocent, or that someone else did it.

^^rsbm

Thanks, @Cindizzi. I agreed then and still do. Judge Murphy correctly recognized that it did not exonerate BM but acknowledged that it was essentially 50/50% that it could create reasonable doubt with one or more jurors.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Just desperation from the Defense to throw some spin on the DNA to try and taint the jury pool. I'm pretty sure your average Jan/Joe Blow will see this 'unidentified male' Legal Eagles are more than likely burning through BM's cash like crazy.

 

[sk716]

In addition to DNA evidence, the letter of intent to sue also says that LE failed to mention in the AA that the tranquilizer gun was inoperable.

Well it came out on day 4 of the Prelim that an officer is on body cam footage saying it, so that means it’s in Discovery, correct?
https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1430206373783035910?s=21
In body camera video you hear Deputy Himshoot say that when he found the gun it did not even work properly. He says that it hadn't been fired recently. @KKTV11News #BarryMorphew #SuzanneMorphew

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1430207252565274628?s=21
Prosecution asks if the gun was ever examined by a firearm expert. Deputy says no it was not. Defense fires back saying that he may not be a firearm expert but he was familiar with guns and he made determinations with familiarity with firearms that it did not appear to work.

I don’t understand how they think putting it in the AA would have exonerated BM.

In fact what IS in the AA is LE asking BM when was the last time he used it to to tranq deer and he said April . The gun appearing to not been used in a long time means he lied about that.

I know that LE narrative is that he used a tranquilizer dart on SM but doesn’t the AA imply that they think he used a .22 to do it? That is what he admits to using when running around chasing chipmunks. JMO

You are spot on in your assessment. They got him to turn over the "chipmunk" gun much later.

 

[genuineusa77]

If the partial DNA found on the glovebox is the same as the partial DNA found on the bike and on the helmet and on the bedsheet in the dyer, then this is a whole new ballgame.

 

[MassGuy]

If the partial DNA found on the glovebox is the same as the partial DNA found on the bike and on the helmet and on the bedsheet in the dyer, then this is a whole new ballgame.

Even his attorneys never claimed that in their letter. You can't just make stuff up. And no, it wouldn't be a whole new ballgame anyway. Barry cannot be separated from this.

 

[sk716]

If the partial DNA found on the glovebox is the same as the partial DNA found on the bike and on the helmet and on the bedsheet in the dyer, then this is a whole new ballgame.

'Partial' means completely useless, legally speaking. And we're not talking about one repeated partial, we're talking about thousands of partials. Possibly tens of thousands.

The DNA means nothing. But the defense is going to be thrilled with how well the SODDI campaign is going.

 

[sk716]

You know what kills me over the tranq gun. He flat out admitted he was running around shooting chipmunks with his .22 in the same moments that Suzanne ceased to communicate with everyone she loved in the world.

I want to put that on a billboard.

 

[genuineusa77]

Your statement above must assume the facts presented by the defense is a true and accurate statement of facts and not another stunt. I think the timing of this info on the heals of the complaint about the DA talking about the case is interesting.
1. If LE did not pursue the DNA as defense is claiming, how did they know an alleged name?
2. They very well could have just received the info (assuming that is factual info) just before trial but was focused on the PH and did not actually review it until afterwards.
I have seen facts get omitted so often to further an agenda than I can count.
This is my own opinion from my experience as an investigator with my company for the last 15 years (not LE investigations) but I do have to work with the Feds.

Well its malicious prosecution because they had evidence and left it out of the prelim which is a big deal because had they presented the evidence the judge may of made a different decision. Not only did they withhold that they located the match of the sex offenders DNA on Suzanne's glove box but that when they tried to question him about the case he lawyered up and refused to talk but they also abruptly cancelled their key witness who was privy to some of this information. Conveniently, the lead investigator, Jeff Lindsay who was the one who did the follow up on the DNA, moved onto another case in another city right before this lawsuit appeared. Its actually a law in CO that if prosecution withholds evidence they can be sued.

 

[sk716]

Well its malicious prosecution because they had evidence and left it out of the prelim which is a big deal because had they presented the evidence the judge may of made a different decision. Not only did they withhold that they located the match of the sex offenders DNA on Suzanne's glove box but that when they tried to question him about the case he lawyered up and refused to talk but they also abruptly cancelled their key witness who was privy to some of this information. Conveniently, the lead investigator, Jeff Lindsay who was the one who did the follow up on the DNA, moved onto another case in another city right before this lawsuit appeared. Its actually a law in CO that if prosecution withholds evidence they can be sued.

You working for the defense or something?

The prosecution didn't leave anything out that could exonerate Barry. Mostly because I'm pretty sure nothing short of Suzanne turning up tanned on a beach in Costa Rica could exonerate Barry.

 

[Cassady]

Interesting article on interesting use of genealogy:

Forensic genealogy: how police are using family trees to solve cold cases

 

[Cindizzi]

Well its malicious prosecution because they had evidence and left it out of the prelim which is a big deal because had they presented the evidence the judge may of made a different decision. Not only did they withhold that they located the match of the sex offenders DNA on Suzanne's glove box but that when they tried to question him about the case he lawyered up and refused to talk but they also abruptly cancelled their key witness who was privy to some of this information. Conveniently, the lead investigator, Jeff Lindsay who was the one who did the follow up on the DNA, moved onto another case in another city right before this lawsuit appeared. Its actually a law in CO that if prosecution withholds evidence they can be sued.

They did not leave DNA evidence out of the Prelim.

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1430213159567204357?s=21
We're back from a quick break. Defense calls CBI Agent Joseph Cahill. He testifies that he collected DNA. There was unknown DNA from a male found on #SuzanneMorphew glove box in her car. @KKTV11News

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1430217092196933639?s=21
Agent Cahill says the report shows that DNA from the glovebox came back to matches of investigative leads that show the partial profile came back to unsolved sexual assault cases. #SuzanneMorphew #BarryMorphew @KKTV11News

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1430223006375292940?s=21
CBI was notified that there was another DNA profile match to an unsolved sexual assault case in Pheonix Arizona from the DNA found on #SuzanneMorphew glovebox. In April 2021 Defense says there was another match from an unsolved sex assault case, this time in Chicago @KKTV11News

Jeff Lindsey was not the lead investigator, he is the Senior Deputy District Attorney and therefore Lead Prosecutor. He would not be the one following up on the results. It would be another CBI Agent due to Agent Cahill being on Military leave.

JL did not “ move on to another case”. He took a position with another District.

jmo

 

[Seattle1]

Well its malicious prosecution because they had evidence and left it out of the prelim which is a big deal because had they presented the evidence the judge may of made a different decision. Not only did they withhold that they located the match of the sex offenders DNA on Suzanne's glove box but that when they tried to question him about the case he lawyered up and refused to talk but they also abruptly cancelled their key witness who was privy to some of this information. Conveniently, the lead investigator, Jeff Lindsay who was the one who did the follow up on the DNA, moved onto another case in another city right before this lawsuit appeared. Its actually a law in CO that if prosecution withholds evidence they can be sued.

You do know that the Judge that made the decision to bind BM over for trial on capital murder disagrees with you, right?

In his detailed explanation of his finding of probable cause Judge Murphy pointed out that while there is no body, the facts appear to point that Suzanne Murphew is deceased, not missing or hiding:

• No one has heard or seen her since May 9, 2020, despite huge media coverage…she has not been sighted or found, and she used her phone a lot.
• Her camelback and sunglasses were in her car and she always rode her bike with them.
• She was a stay-at-home mother to raise her kids and had no outside source of income from which she could hide money to use it to disappear.
• She had received an inheritance, but it was used to buy the home. (Morphew had said that “he was Suzanne’s ATM” indicating he was in control of the money.)
• She always had her bible, her journal, and the book “The Courage to Change” together. But her journal was missing and evidence of the journal was found burned in the fireplace.
• Her purse, driver’s license, credit cards, and cash were left.
• Most important, added Murphy, she was a dedicated and caring mother. “This is not in dispute … she said ‘Once Macy is gone – I won’t be able to do it’…. it would make little sense that she would absent herself from her kids’ lives, or of the rest of her family or friends.”

A cap of a tranquilizer needle was found in the home’s dryer along with Morphew’s clothes and Suzanne’s phone’s GPS on Saturday afternoon around the time that Barry Morphew returned home, showed her circling the home’s yard in a manner similar to the behavior of large wildlife that have been tranquilized, just after her last known phone contact.

Murphey reiterated a few key facts about Barry Morphew’s behavior. Among them:

• Mr. Morphew arrived home at 2:44 p.m. on Saturday, May 9. Three minutes later his phone is put in airplane mode until 10:17 p.m. “That is 7.5 hours – that is ample time to dispose of Suzanne’s body,” said Murphy.
• On Sunday, May 10, Morphew was up and doing something pre-dawn, GPS tracking showed that included driving to the areas where Suzanne’s bike and bike helmet were found later that day. In fact, he made a left turn on CR 225, which he claimed was due to following a bull elk to see where the antlers dropped. But the Chaffee Sheriff’s Dept. found that at the time of day when he left it was pitch dark, and elk shed their antlers long before May.
• Morphew then drove to Broomfield and made at least five stops that he said were stops to discard trash, but he didn’t tell law enforcement about the stops when questioned, part of a history of changing his story as time went on.

[..]

Of the three possible scenarios, the judge said that it was possible that either Morphew murdered her and disposed of the body, or that someone unknown took Suzanne and murdered her. “I think it is unlikely that she intentionally disappeared.”

He pointed out that “I find the evidence and presence of unknown DNA in the glove box of her car, and that this person has committed other sexual assaults to be important.” He noted that the DNA found is linked to three other sexual assaults; two in Arizona and one in Chicago.

“This is particularly significant – it’ doesn’t prove that he [Barry Morphew] is innocent, or that someone else did it.

Suzanne Morphew Murder to Proceed to Trial, Barry Morphew Bail set at $500,000 - by Jan Wondra - Ark Valley Voice

 

[genuineusa77]

It seems they had much more information they did not disclose, again against the law. The law firm representing Barry is literally one of the best in the nation. I would find it highly unlikely they are going to make up lies or take on a case they don’t think has validity. Linda Stanley has been in over her head from the day she took office. She will be the downfall of this whole case, wonder if Lindsey has already flipped on her

 

[MassGuy]

It seems they had much more information they did not disclose, again against the law. The law firm representing Barry is literally one of the best in the nation. I would find it highly unlikely they are going to make up lies or take on a case they don’t think has validity. Linda Stanley has been in over her head from the day she took office. She will be the downfall of this whole case, wonder if Lindsey has already flipped on her

People who believe this nonsense either are completely ignorant of the case facts, to include the entire preliminary hearing, or they must fall for a lot of phone scams.

 

[Boxer]

In addition to DNA evidence, the letter of intent to sue also says that LE failed to mention in the AA that the tranquilizer gun was inoperable.

Well it came out on day 4 of the Prelim that an officer is on body cam footage saying it, so that means it’s in Discovery, correct?
https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1430206373783035910?s=21
In body camera video you hear Deputy Himshoot say that when he found the gun it did not even work properly. He says that it hadn't been fired recently. @KKTV11News #BarryMorphew #SuzanneMorphew

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1430207252565274628?s=21
Prosecution asks if the gun was ever examined by a firearm expert. Deputy says no it was not. Defense fires back saying that he may not be a firearm expert but he was familiar with guns and he made determinations with familiarity with firearms that it did not appear to work.

I don’t understand how they think putting it in the AA would have exonerated BM.

In fact what IS in the AA is LE asking BM when was the last time he used it to to tranq deer and he said April . The gun appearing to not been used in a long time means he lied about that.

I know that LE narrative is that he used a tranquilizer dart on SM but doesn’t the AA imply that they think he used a .22 to do it? That is what he admits to using when running around chasing chipmunks. JMO

BM stated to police he used a tranq gun in April 2020, a month before SM went missing to shoot deer from the breezeway and saw off their horns.
Something was operable used for that, A month of not using a a tranq weapon is not "long time."

 

[fcavanaugh]

If the partial DNA found on the glovebox is the same as the partial DNA found on the bike and on the helmet and on the bedsheet in the dyer, then this is a whole new ballgame.

It is not the same DNA though.
The partial match SA DNA found on the glovebox isn’t the same DNA that was found on the bike, helmet, etc.
Again, imo the DNA in this case is a distraction, non-starter, red herring, which team BM is using to try and muddy the waters and sway public opinion/future jury pool.

As has been discussed previously, the random DNA could’ve been deposited on those items any number of innocent ways. No need to keep repeating how, read posts upthread. Anyway, the theory being pushed by team BM has been that SM disappeared from a bike ride, not from her vehicle or home. Since their big concern of late appears to be focused mostly on the partial match to SA DNA found on the glovebox, seems team BM’s new theory is going to be SODDI abducted SM from her vehicle and decided to stage her bike and helmet?? Has to be all that, because if they want to say that SODDI took her from her car, they have to also assert/explain that he staged the bike and planted the helmet. Which leads to also having to explain how SODDI managed to get his DNA on the glovebox of car but not on the bike and helmet. So are they going to want people to believe he wasn’t wearing gloves when he grabbed her from her car, but managed to remember to put on gloves before touching and staging the bike and planting the helmet?? Besides the idea of an abductor only wearing gloves for part of the crime defying logic and making no sense whatsoever, what abductor is going to ambush and abduct someone in broad daylight from one location and decide to also take the time to stage a 2nd crime scene and plant something at 3rd location???

The whole idea of abducting someone and especially in broad daylight, is an enormous risk to take. The MO of most abductors is to get in to ‘wherever’ as fast as they can, grab their target/victim, and get outta dodge just as fast. They do not hang around burning things in fireplaces, or staging and planting items in various other locations. Again, the risk factor of being seen/getting caught is enormous, and no abductor is going to hang around taking time to do all those other things. No way. Even if team BM were to focus on the random unknown DNA in the home and say SODDI abducted her from the home, same as above applies i.e., have to explain the staged bike and helmet, sticking around burning things etc., etc, etc.

At any rate, the random DNA doesn’t negate the evidence against BM, nor can any SODDI abduction scenario be reconciled against or explain BM sketchy actions/behaviors, lies and inconsistent statements after the fact. Why all the inconsistencies and lies if he had no involvement/didn’t do anything wrong? Innocent people with nothing to hide, hide nothing. Period.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne


ETA-clarity

 

[Cindizzi]

It seems they had much more information they did not disclose, again against the law. The law firm representing Barry is literally one of the best in the nation. I would find it highly unlikely they are going to make up lies or take on a case they don’t think has validity. Linda Stanley has been in over her head from the day she took office. She will be the downfall of this whole case, wonder if Lindsey has already flipped on her

That’s right, it seems …. like that because they want it to seem like that to the Public and potential jury pool.
None of us have seen the 10 page letter of intent to file a civil suit nor have we seen a response from the DA or LE named. We don’t know if they have valid claims here, no matter how big a law firm they are. There is a new Colorado law to hold LE more accountable and some legal experts have said perhaps these lawyers want to be first to try it and make a test case of it.
It’s not part of his Criminal case but I guess we’ll hear more as it is leaked out.

https://twitter.com/ashleykktv/status/1451687712327548930?s=21
#UPDATE: I've obtained a copy of the letter sent to several investigators, DA, and sheriff who are involved in the #BarryMorphew case.
Attorneys intend to sue them for several things.
Join me at 5:30 on @KKTV11News for a breakdown.

First reported by @CarolAMcKinley


Lawyers for Barry Morphew plan to sue prosecutors and investigators tied to the case of Suzanne Morphew

“A family friend of Morphew sent 11 News Reporter Ashley Franco the documents. “

 

[al66pine]

Malicious Prosecution, or Not?

Well its malicious prosecution because they had evidence and left it out of the prelim ....

@genuineusa770 sbm Interesting, but I respectfully disagree. I'm addressing MP generally & not the facts of this case.

For a criminal defendant's claim of "malicious prosecution"* to succeed requires evidence that the criminal prosecution was pursued without probable cause plus other elements.
W a preliminary hearing determination that there's enough evidence to require a trial, the judge's order/ruling binding def. over for trial precludes crim. defendant from proving that element in a civil MP case.

Also iirc, BM's (threatened) lawsuit is not for Malicious Prosecution; the Notice of Intent letter referenced Colorado Revised Statutes, "13-21-131. Civil action for deprivation of rights - definition."**

Welcoming comment or correction, esp'ly from our legal professionals. my2ct.
_______________________________
* CO. Jury Instructions re MALICIOUS PROSECUTION "17:1 ELEMENTS OF LIABILITY.... defendant’s statement(s) against the plaintiff (was) (were) made without probable cause;..."
^ https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Committees/Civil_Jury_Instructions_Committee/2020/Chapter%2017.pdf
Also: "Malicious prosecution is a common law intentional
tort.... elements include (1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing.... a legal action (civil or criminal) that is (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution." bbm sbm
^ Malicious prosecution - Wikipedia
** Sections re this "civil action for deprivation rights" were originally enacted as part of SENATE BILL 20-217.
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2020a_217_signed.pdf Pages 12-13 of pdf.