Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #86

[Murphy1950]

To be fair, it's rare to find all 46 chromosomes in any circumstance - especially a touch DNA circumstance. Unless the person recently bled on the object. But often, there's one complete chromosome - which if autosomal, in particular, gives a unique profile.

If several chromosomes are found on an object, unless they are still in the nucleus of the cell, no one can tell for sure that they are all from the same person.

It's not completely clear in this case what exactly is going on with the glove box DNA, as it was explained by lawyers who, IMO, are notorious for bending nomenclature around DNA. Further, sometimes analysis tries to put chromosomes back together if it looks like they should go together, like puzzle pieces (this leads to controversial findings, for sure). What seems to be certain is that more than one Y chromosome was found - but how they would know which autosomal chromosome each of those went with, well...again, unless it was recent and involved body fluid of some kind, it's not easy for a forensic analyst to put a complete picture together. Y chromosome matches are legion (because it doesn't go through a process called "crossover" and so it tends to be passed from father to son virtually unchanged...)

Curious @10ofRods your take on this DNA fiasco. Do you think its smoke and mirrors, just throwing spaghetti at a wall(?) on the part of the defense team?

 

[LandManatee]

IMO MOO
I don’t have the AA in front of me to reference, but what stood out that I can’t shake, is the mention of a bare footprint (IIRC) on the Bobcat bucket and 3 LE dogs “hitting” either on the Bobcat seat and/or Bobcat trailer. One dog that hit on the Bobcat seat was eager to sit on the seat to indicate a hit. These are significant findings.

I have wondered who could have left what I speculate was a fresh footprint on the Bobcat bucket and why. Usually anyone working around such heavy and dangerous machinery would not be barefoot. It is such an odd finding to me. The only person IMO that could have left a footprint imprint (if it occurred within the 24 hrs it was discovered) would have been Suzanne.

We know Suzanne was sunbathing on 5/9 when BM arrived home with the Bobcat on the trailer. She likely had sandals to go with her bikini outfit, which were probably off while she was lounging, thus she being the only one with a logical reason to be barefoot on that day.

If BM snuck up on her and hit her with a dart, it has been mentioned it could have taken up to 8 minutes for her to be sedated. What if during those moments of shock, panic and fear of her realizing what was happening, instead of running indoors, she instead scrambled about outdoors and around the house towards the garage. In her induced state, her survival instincts thought she should get to higher ground and she stumbled about the Bobcat, trying to climb onto it and left a footprint in the bucket.

I don’t know that all the pieces fit for this scenario to be likely but it has left me wondering what the circumstances were for a footprint to be discovered in the Bobcat bucket.

It also doesn’t quite explain the dogs hitting on the seat and trailer. One scenario I thought of to explain the dog hits was what if the dart actually killed her and not just sedated her. Did she manage to climb into the Bobcat and collapsed on the seat and partially onto the trailer? Would dogs pick up her scent if she was left a few minutes after death on the Bobcat while BM then organized himself to move her?

IMO MOO

 

[Boxer]

IMO MOO
I don’t have the AA in front of me to reference, but what stood out that I can’t shake, is the mention of a bare footprint (IIRC) on the Bobcat bucket and 3 LE dogs “hitting” either on the Bobcat seat and/or Bobcat trailer. One dog that hit on the Bobcat seat was eager to sit on the seat to indicate a hit. These are significant findings.

I have wondered who could have left what I speculate was a fresh footprint on the Bobcat bucket and why. Usually anyone working around such heavy and dangerous machinery would not be barefoot. It is such an odd finding to me. The only person IMO that could have left a footprint imprint (if it occurred within the 24 hrs it was discovered) would have been Suzanne.

We know Suzanne was sunbathing on 5/9 when BM arrived home with the Bobcat on the trailer. She likely had sandals to go with her bikini outfit, which were probably off while she was lounging, thus she being the only one with a logical reason to be barefoot on that day.

If BM snuck up on her and hit her with a dart, it has been mentioned it could have taken up to 8 minutes for her to be sedated. What if during those moments of shock, panic and fear of her realizing what was happening, instead of running indoors, she instead scrambled about outdoors and around the house towards the garage. In her induced state, her survival instincts thought she should get to higher ground and she stumbled about the Bobcat, trying to climb onto it and left a footprint in the bucket.

I don’t know that all the pieces fit for this scenario to be likely but it has left me wondering what the circumstances were for a footprint to be discovered in the Bobcat bucket.

It also doesn’t quite explain the dogs hitting on the seat and trailer. One scenario I thought of to explain the dog hits was what if the dart actually killed her and not just sedated her. Did she manage to climb into the Bobcat and collapsed on the seat and partially onto the trailer? Would dogs pick up her scent if she was left a few minutes after death on the Bobcat while BM then organized himself to move her?

IMO MOO

Good analysis.
And it fits his wierd obsession about a Bobcat getting her.

MOO I believe her car was blocked in by the truck and trailer.

If she ran around to try and get to her car, only to realize she was trapped, a back and forth chase could definitely happen at the trailer.

 

[Boxer]

So I think it’s been established that the DNA found on the glovebox (full profile) is a partial match to the SA offender DNA (full profile) in CODIS. Meaning, it is not the SA offender’s DNA on the glovebox but likely a relative of his. So they have the SA offender’s name from CODIS but not the name of the person/relative of the SA whose DNA showed up on the glovebox, that we know of. At least that is what I understand from my own research, and reading up on the topic here and other places.
For all I know, LE has since found this person and cleared them based on alibi etc., and has provided the info to the DC.

On another note, I found this interesting article that explains some things about the reliability of DNA found at crime scenes today, and the importance of having other corroborating evidence to be able to really put crime scene DNA into context, which leads me to further deduce that the DNA found on Suzanne’s vehicle glovebox and other random DNA found on the various other items is a big nothingburger, since there’s been no mention of any corroborating evidence found (fingerprints, fibers, etc.) to tie to any of this random DNA and no one else has been arrested, so…And again, imo everything, all the evidence clearly points to BM. IMO, his DC knows it which is why they aren’t harping on his alibi because they know he doesn’t have one. SMDH. The DC literally has nothing else but to try and poke holes in LE investigation and try to sow reasonable doubt in public opinion/future jurors. That’s exactly what they’re hoping will happen with the imo useless DNA, which imo they may end up backing themselves into a corner with and likely will ultimately backfire making things worse for their client, if that is even possible for BM to look worse than he already does.
Snipped from article at link below:
Why DNA Evidence Can Be Unreliable

Myth 1: DNA Is Infallible:
One of the most pervasive fictions, says Phillips, is that DNA found at a crime scene is de facto proof of guilt. That may have been true(ish) 20 years ago when DNA could only be reliably extracted from fresh blood stains, semen and other large tissue samples. But today's forensic technology is so sensitive and precise that viable DNA can be pulled from just a few individual cells.
This so-called "touch DNA" or "trace DNA" has given investigators much more evidence to analyze, but it comes at a cost. We leave traces of our DNA everywhere, in dead skin cells, stray spit and strands of hair.
“The hardest job for investigators is to differentiate DNA that belongs to the criminal and DNA that randomly finds its way to the crime scene.

There's something called 'accidental transfer' or 'secondary transfer,'" says Phillips. "The DNA on a weapon might come from the person who actually touched the object or the person who shook hands with the person who touched the object."

“Sometimes it's the forensic investigators themselves who accidentally contaminate the evidence. The guide shares the bizarre example of Adam Scott, a man wrongfully convicted of rape when his DNA was found in a genital swab. Scott's DNA was a perfect match — a one in a billion probability — and it was the only evidence used to convict him, despite Scott's claim that he was more than 200 miles (322 kilometers) away the night of the incident.
Scott spent five months in custody before the truth came out. A technician in the crime lab had reused a plastic plate that contained a sample of Scott's saliva from an unrelated "spitting incident." Phone records also corroborated Scott's claim that he was in his hometown at the time of the attack.”

“Phillips says that judges and prosecutors have learned from examples like the Scott case that DNA evidence alone is not enough to convict. With even a chance of contamination or secondary transfer, there must be other forms of corroborating evidence — like fiber samples, eyewitness accounts or fingerprints — that put the DNA results into context.”

All of the above IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne


Why DNA Evidence Can Be Unreliable

Most criminals are arguing the trace of their DNA isnt proof.
In this case N&E are arguing it is an alternative theory not sufficiently followed up on, proving tumnel vision.
The DA just needs to get the fact out in a logical way.

 

[sk716]

IMO MOO
I don’t have the AA in front of me to reference, but what stood out that I can’t shake, is the mention of a bare footprint (IIRC) on the Bobcat bucket and 3 LE dogs “hitting” either on the Bobcat seat and/or Bobcat trailer. One dog that hit on the Bobcat seat was eager to sit on the seat to indicate a hit. These are significant findings.

I have wondered who could have left what I speculate was a fresh footprint on the Bobcat bucket and why. Usually anyone working around such heavy and dangerous machinery would not be barefoot. It is such an odd finding to me. The only person IMO that could have left a footprint imprint (if it occurred within the 24 hrs it was discovered) would have been Suzanne.

We know Suzanne was sunbathing on 5/9 when BM arrived home with the Bobcat on the trailer. She likely had sandals to go with her bikini outfit, which were probably off while she was lounging, thus she being the only one with a logical reason to be barefoot on that day.

If BM snuck up on her and hit her with a dart, it has been mentioned it could have taken up to 8 minutes for her to be sedated. What if during those moments of shock, panic and fear of her realizing what was happening, instead of running indoors, she instead scrambled about outdoors and around the house towards the garage. In her induced state, her survival instincts thought she should get to higher ground and she stumbled about the Bobcat, trying to climb onto it and left a footprint in the bucket.

I don’t know that all the pieces fit for this scenario to be likely but it has left me wondering what the circumstances were for a footprint to be discovered in the Bobcat bucket.

It also doesn’t quite explain the dogs hitting on the seat and trailer. One scenario I thought of to explain the dog hits was what if the dart actually killed her and not just sedated her. Did she manage to climb into the Bobcat and collapsed on the seat and partially onto the trailer? Would dogs pick up her scent if she was left a few minutes after death on the Bobcat while BM then organized himself to move her?

IMO MOO

I think it's highly probable that he had her in the Bobcat bucket at some point. I'm reasonably certain that he used the Bobcat to get her up the mountain and move a boulder to unseal an abandoned shaft mine. There are three he could get to on the Bobcat. There is a Google Earth link in my signature that will show you the locations of all of the paths and shafts.

What I'm not certain about is if he pulled the Bobcat over to the trail on the trailer or just drove it down there. The trailer was involved somehow because when CCSO examined the Bobcat on the day, it was positioned as if it was used to take the trailer off of the truck hitch and there were chunks of rock on the trailer. I can see him thinking it would be quieter, but I think it would be too conspicuous if someone happened along in the middle of the night. Barry doesn't always think that far out though.

 

[nyvictoria]

I haven’t been around much in the past month and thought I might come back to some new news. Unfortunately, it seems some are still questioning the partial DNA and thinking it will exonerate Barry. It won’t. The DNA “match” the defense is trying to sell isn’t going to convict a SODDI or clear Barry. It’s just a distraction and an attempt to taint the jury pool. But then, I guess that’s the point of the Defense’s supposed lawsuit. It was nice of them to tell the media all about it.

 

[Hazelnutty]

IMO MOO
I don’t have the AA in front of me to reference, but what stood out that I can’t shake, is the mention of a bare footprint (IIRC) on the Bobcat bucket and 3 LE dogs “hitting” either on the Bobcat seat and/or Bobcat trailer. One dog that hit on the Bobcat seat was eager to sit on the seat to indicate a hit. These are significant findings.

I have wondered who could have left what I speculate was a fresh footprint on the Bobcat bucket and why. Usually anyone working around such heavy and dangerous machinery would not be barefoot. It is such an odd finding to me. The only person IMO that could have left a footprint imprint (if it occurred within the 24 hrs it was discovered) would have been Suzanne.

We know Suzanne was sunbathing on 5/9 when BM arrived home with the Bobcat on the trailer. She likely had sandals to go with her bikini outfit, which were probably off while she was lounging, thus she being the only one with a logical reason to be barefoot on that day.

If BM snuck up on her and hit her with a dart, it has been mentioned it could have taken up to 8 minutes for her to be sedated. What if during those moments of shock, panic and fear of her realizing what was happening, instead of running indoors, she instead scrambled about outdoors and around the house towards the garage. In her induced state, her survival instincts thought she should get to higher ground and she stumbled about the Bobcat, trying to climb onto it and left a footprint in the bucket.

I don’t know that all the pieces fit for this scenario to be likely but it has left me wondering what the circumstances were for a footprint to be discovered in the Bobcat bucket.

It also doesn’t quite explain the dogs hitting on the seat and trailer. One scenario I thought of to explain the dog hits was what if the dart actually killed her and not just sedated her. Did she manage to climb into the Bobcat and collapsed on the seat and partially onto the trailer? Would dogs pick up her scent if she was left a few minutes after death on the Bobcat while BM then organized himself to move her?

IMO MOO

Oh my gosh! I had forgotten all about that bare footprint until you mentioned it. Who else would be barefoot and running to escape the crazy man ? She had been sunbathing , which does happen with bare feet, afterall!

Hmmm....

 

[Cindizzi]

IMO MOO
I don’t have the AA in front of me to reference, but what stood out that I can’t shake, is the mention of a bare footprint (IIRC) on the Bobcat bucket and 3 LE dogs “hitting” either on the Bobcat seat and/or Bobcat trailer. One dog that hit on the Bobcat seat was eager to sit on the seat to indicate a hit. These are significant findings.

I have wondered who could have left what I speculate was a fresh footprint on the Bobcat bucket and why. Usually anyone working around such heavy and dangerous machinery would not be barefoot. It is such an odd finding to me. The only person IMO that could have left a footprint imprint (if it occurred within the 24 hrs it was discovered) would have been Suzanne.

We know Suzanne was sunbathing on 5/9 when BM arrived home with the Bobcat on the trailer. She likely had sandals to go with her bikini outfit, which were probably off while she was lounging, thus she being the only one with a logical reason to be barefoot on that day.

If BM snuck up on her and hit her with a dart, it has been mentioned it could have taken up to 8 minutes for her to be sedated. What if during those moments of shock, panic and fear of her realizing what was happening, instead of running indoors, she instead scrambled about outdoors and around the house towards the garage. In her induced state, her survival instincts thought she should get to higher ground and she stumbled about the Bobcat, trying to climb onto it and left a footprint in the bucket.

I don’t know that all the pieces fit for this scenario to be likely but it has left me wondering what the circumstances were for a footprint to be discovered in the Bobcat bucket.

It also doesn’t quite explain the dogs hitting on the seat and trailer. One scenario I thought of to explain the dog hits was what if the dart actually killed her and not just sedated her. Did she manage to climb into the Bobcat and collapsed on the seat and partially onto the trailer? Would dogs pick up her scent if she was left a few minutes after death on the Bobcat while BM then organized himself to move her?

IMO MOO

That bare foot print has intrigued me, too. And the dog sitting on the bobcat seat I wondered if instead of SM body being on the seat, BM being in the seat after he had “handled “ the body ( hate typing that)and scent was on him. He did throw away a camo coat, boots and bags of .. we don’t know what.
But if this were the case, his truck would have the scent after transporting his clothes and boots to Broomfield, right? Haven’t really thought this through entirely.
Still just baffled that they say the bobcat is not connected.
JMO

 

[marylamby]

That bare foot print has intrigued me, too. And the dog sitting on the bobcat seat I wondered if instead of SM body being on the seat, BM being in the seat after he had “handled “ the body ( hate typing that)and scent was on him. He did throw away a camo coat, boots and bags of .. we don’t know what.
But if this were the case, his truck would have the scent after transporting his clothes and boots to Broomfield, right? Haven’t really thought this through entirely.
Still just baffled that they say the bobcat is not connected.
JMO

"Still just baffled that they say the bobcat is not connected."
Me too. I don't remember if the dogs were scent or cadaver dogs. Maybe someone can help me out here. I hate to keep relying on all of you but I've recently had a lot of work (which is very cool but not conducive to finding info in this case).
Thankfully I'm working from home and can check in often.
I don't think she found herself into the bobcat cab or the trailer on her own. If anything, she ran to her car or tried to escape into the woods. It's a puzzle with a lot of missing pieces which is exactly what could sway a juror. Some people need things to be nice and tidy and I find that concerning, even with all of the other existential evidence.

Yes, she would likely be barefooted while sunning. Then again, the crime pod enthusiast might've thought it would be a good idea to go unshod. Did LE measure the footprint? Hope they did. That would eliminate the certain possibilities.

It only makes sense that the dogs, whichever trained they were, tried to lie down on the seat and the trailer. I don't know how long someone alive or dead can leave scent - again, I suspect someone here may know and your input would be greatly appreciated.

Did he throw her into the bobcat while she was incapacitated and then use the trailer and bucket to throw her off a ridge? I dunno, but I do believe there's a high probability she was in there one way or another.

Just an aside, the DA need to secure a DNA expert to explain partial dna - and I mean one with excellent credentials. They also need to follow up on every possible partial match. You know the defense will. That's all they got and be sure, they'll eat up as much time as possible trying to instill doubt in the jury.

eta: this is in response to more than a few thoughtful comments regarding these questions.

 

[gamma gal]

IMO MOO
I don’t have the AA in front of me to reference, but what stood out that I can’t shake, is the mention of a bare footprint (IIRC) on the Bobcat bucket and 3 LE dogs “hitting” either on the Bobcat seat and/or Bobcat trailer. One dog that hit on the Bobcat seat was eager to sit on the seat to indicate a hit. These are significant findings.

I have wondered who could have left what I speculate was a fresh footprint on the Bobcat bucket and why. Usually anyone working around such heavy and dangerous machinery would not be barefoot. It is such an odd finding to me. The only person IMO that could have left a footprint imprint (if it occurred within the 24 hrs it was discovered) would have been Suzanne.

We know Suzanne was sunbathing on 5/9 when BM arrived home with the Bobcat on the trailer. She likely had sandals to go with her bikini outfit, which were probably off while she was lounging, thus she being the only one with a logical reason to be barefoot on that day.

If BM snuck up on her and hit her with a dart, it has been mentioned it could have taken up to 8 minutes for her to be sedated. What if during those moments of shock, panic and fear of her realizing what was happening, instead of running indoors, she instead scrambled about outdoors and around the house towards the garage. In her induced state, her survival instincts thought she should get to higher ground and she stumbled about the Bobcat, trying to climb onto it and left a footprint in the bucket.

I don’t know that all the pieces fit for this scenario to be likely but it has left me wondering what the circumstances were for a footprint to be discovered in the Bobcat bucket.

It also doesn’t quite explain the dogs hitting on the seat and trailer. One scenario I thought of to explain the dog hits was what if the dart actually killed her and not just sedated her. Did she manage to climb into the Bobcat and collapsed on the seat and partially onto the trailer? Would dogs pick up her scent if she was left a few minutes after death on the Bobcat while BM then organized himself to move her?

IMO MOO

How big is the bucket on the bobcat? I think he wrapped her in the brown towel or a sheet and placed her in the bucket of the bobcat for transfer to another location. He likely loaded the dart with a lethal dose of sedative. Why would he just tranquilize her? But he didn't want a mess, so hitting her with the dart was a clean demise. She wasn't going to leave him and take half of everything. He was going to make sure of that.

 

[marylamby]

How big is the bucket on the bobcat? I think he wrapped her in the brown towel or a sheet and placed her in the bucket of the bobcat for transfer to another location. He likely loaded the dart with a lethal dose of sedative. Why would he just tranquilize her? But he didn't want a mess, so hitting her with the dart was a clean demise. She wasn't going to leave him and take half of everything. He was going to make sure of that.

Then there's his zig-zagging all over the place, as far as the lethal dose. I hate to say it but I think it's a much more grotesque scenario.

 

[jakat]

AA Page 43

On May 23, 2020, search teams along with K-9s and K-9 handlers (Blood Hound Man Trackers NecroSearch) searched the 19507 Puma Path property. During this search, three different K-9s were used. Each of the three K-9s were ran blindly and individually during the search. On the west area of the driveway/parking area, where a flatbed trailer and Bobcat Skid Steer are parked, all three K-9s "trained final response" alerted (the K-9s used have been trained in a specific way to alert their handlers when they detect possible human decomp/remains) on the top of the trailer. It should be noted, on the bed of the trailer is gravel and dirt. This is an area the K-9s alerted. All three K-9s again alerted on the Bobcat, and one of the K-9s jumped into the Bobcat and tried to lay down on the driver's seat. The Bobcat located on the Morphew's property is identified as a 2018 B0bcat Compact Skid Steer, Model# S590 and product identification number AR9R18813. The Bobcat Skid Steer and trailer are parked directly next to each other.

 

[Kemug]

I can't quite decide whether BM is more of a jerk, or more of a creep?

 

[coastal]

I can't quite decide whether BM is more of a jerk, or more of a creep?

Either way, you're right. How often can you say that?

 

[FromGermany1]

Then there's his zig-zagging all over the place, as far as the lethal dose. I hate to say it but I think it's a much more grotesque scenario.

I had the impression, they had experience with the game "BM chasing SM" - maybe, the hunter in him found it sexually stimulating? But no wonder, one day (when the marriage was struggling) the exciting game became dangerous and serious. IMO

 

[FromGermany1]

AA Page 43

On May 23, 2020, search teams along with K-9s and K-9 handlers (Blood Hound Man Trackers NecroSearch) searched the 19507 Puma Path property. During this search, three different K-9s were used. Each of the three K-9s were ran blindly and individually during the search. On the west area of the driveway/parking area, where a flatbed trailer and Bobcat Skid Steer are parked, all three K-9s "trained final response" alerted (the K-9s used have been trained in a specific way to alert their handlers when they detect possible human decomp/remains) on the top of the trailer. It should be noted, on the bed of the trailer is gravel and dirt. This is an area the K-9s alerted. All three K-9s again alerted on the Bobcat, and one of the K-9s jumped into the Bobcat and tried to lay down on the driver's seat. The Bobcat located on the Morphew's property is identified as a 2018 B0bcat Compact Skid Steer, Model# S590 and product identification number AR9R18813. The Bobcat Skid Steer and trailer are parked directly next to each other.

bbm
It means, there was a dead body and no sedated body on these vehicles, if I'm understanding well.

 

[FromGermany1]

I think it's highly probable that he had her in the Bobcat bucket at some point. I'm reasonably certain that he used the Bobcat to get her up the mountain and move a boulder to unseal an abandoned shaft mine. There are three he could get to on the Bobcat. There is a Google Earth link in my signature that will show you the locations of all of the paths and shafts.

What I'm not certain about is if he pulled the Bobcat over to the trail on the trailer or just drove it down there. The trailer was involved somehow because when CCSO examined the Bobcat on the day, it was positioned as if it was used to take the trailer off of the truck hitch and there were chunks of rock on the trailer. I can see him thinking it would be quieter, but I think it would be too conspicuous if someone happened along in the middle of the night. Barry doesn't always think that far out though.

Did he return from where ever (dumping SM) and loaded some dirt onto the trailer (beside the bobcat) by night, when the elderly woman heard machines running on a construction site?? Does it make sense, is it on the route, he might have driven back? Idk.

 

[Megnut]

Dare we believe Barry and his strange interpretation of religion? That he didn't, in his mind, kill her, he (and God) just let her die? I make no distinction (he'd be guilty both ways, because of intent and depravity), but from a true crime position, he'd be (sickly) clever to sedate her for transport to avoid cadaverine in the home. Maybe that was his plan? Sedate, just like the deer, and then bury her and let fate take over....

But things got personal in the bedroom. They were close enough and she was alive enough to scratch him so maybe he took matters into his own (bare) hands.

JMO

 

[K9Enzo]

bbm
It means, there was a dead body and no sedated body on these vehicles, if I'm understanding well.

Cadaver dirt.

IMO

 

[jakat]

I can't quite decide whether BM is more of a jerk, or more of a creep?

Both!