Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #88

[mrjitty]

I guess you guys have discussed this in huge detail before - seems he should have done a 'master reset'?

https://www.fordpass.com/content/ford_com/fp_app/en_us/termsprivacy.html

To stop FordPass-related vehicle data transmission and access enabled by connecting your vehicle to FordPass, contact the customer relationship center; and consult your vehicle's Owner’s Manual (and follow the procedure to disable your connectivity device which may require performing a Master Reset to stop data transmission.

Fuse 29 is the one for SYNC and GPS, but as we know, GPS was still working.

Hmmmm

 

[mrjitty]

That is my guess as well. If that fuse is pulled, I don't think the GPS would work, period. Also, I don't think any SYNC data would be sent. What I am wondering about is if this would cause a power removal event. Seems unlikely to me. Why would one design a system that cuts power if the GPS and SYNC don't work?

As someone pointed out in a previous thread, the logs are really just thousands of events that the computer logs. So removing one fuse could cause a "power removal" log I guess

The problem is Grusing said there was a complete reboot of the truck, so that doesn't sound like taking out the SYNC fuse. I guess they know this from whatever specific codes are included in that log. Could removing the SYNC fuse crash the truck computer briefly and the system rebooted?

I am wondering if BM was attempting to do something like a master reset which would wipe all stored data, and disable sync? A reboot implies more the truck computer systems restarting than resetting.

Hmmm

 

[Boxer]

to me "from the garage" doesn't mean "in the garage"

He could have just been parked in front of it.

Agree. I thought parking there was to block SMs car.

 

[Boxer]

I guess you guys have discussed this in huge detail before - seems he should have done a 'master reset'?

https://www.fordpass.com/content/ford_com/fp_app/en_us/termsprivacy.html

To stop FordPass-related vehicle data transmission and access enabled by connecting your vehicle to FordPass, contact the customer relationship center; and consult your vehicle's Owner’s Manual (and follow the procedure to disable your connectivity device which may require performing a Master Reset to stop data transmission.

Fuse 29 is the one for SYNC and GPS, but as we know, GPS was still working.

Hmmmm

If the GPS worked why is there a mileage discrepancy?
They must know where truck went.

 

[mrjitty]

If the GPS worked why is there a mileage discrepancy?
They must know where truck went.

This is a great point actually.

So either they do know, and just didn't get into that in the Prelim

OR

He did selectively remove the SYNC / GPS fuse?

That could explain quite a bit. The truck would still be logging all kinds of other things, but it would have allowed him to drive west, without the Truck logging the GPS of it. So he takes that fuse out when he leaves before 4am, then he puts that Fuse back in when he gets to his destination later than morning?

 

[Scootie98]

The petition to replace the judge may simply be more insurance....to be one more grounds for appeal if BM is convicted and the judge denies the motion and stays on the case. His lawyers are thorough, after all.

 

[Love Never Fails]

BM claimed to believe a husband could vote for his wife (after murdering her).

This is not a man that respects women.

Who would vote for his wife anyway? Suppose she wanted to vote for the other side! Him just saying he voted for her proves his guilt to me. She is gone and he supposedly cared more about his candidate winning that getting her back home?! He knows he killed her. We know he killed her. I just pray she is found soon!

 

[Megnut]

Y'all did good work overnight.

Voting. Point being, Suzanne DIDN'T get a vote (about what she wore, did, ate, never mind politically). She was probably NEVER free to vote contrary to him, if she so wanted (at least not without having to lie).

The truck. We heard about Barry's PHONE being places on the morning of 5/9. Did his truck GPS sync with that? Must have.

So the question is, what benefit did Barry attempt to gain with the reset and did he get it?

It seems that LE didn't know about the Garfield run except for the turn signal indicator. And the 18 mile discrepancy.

Barry apparently tried to account for the miles by saying he went to town (the mechanical thingy and/or the spa store) and tried to account for the left turn by inventing an elk herd. No sale.

So it remains, what did he reset it for?

Did he do it so he'd be set for a morning drive up to Garfield? Forgot he'd be moving the truck that evening (backing it up 95 feet)? He clearly had no idea (who would?!) that his truck would record every door event!

Did Barry reset the truck system to hide his planned trip up to Garfield? Seems like a lot of monkey business just to stage one helmet.

How does LE know he backed the truck up, 95 feet? It recorded reverse in his driveway for a timed period? and .... forward the next day? They had GPS for the driveway but not Garfield? It's got to be that, right? Drive time, direction (forward and reverse) but NOT geolocation! LE did not know he went as far as Garfield until he told them! So maybe he went somewhere else just without using his turn signal!!! He did seem to know he'd want one generally seamless drive to Broomfield. (Did he think they wouldn't notice that he spent more time at dumpsters that doing work?)

What was he doing???? It was worth the detour and didn't require exiting the car but was also worth the trouble of wiping or blocking the GPS.

It had to be critical to his cover.

What was it?????

He gives me a headache.

JMO

 

[Hoss569]

If the GPS worked why is there a mileage discrepancy?
They must know where truck went.

Most all vehicle computers do record the engine vitals, transmission vitals & speed/rpm outside of GPS type of events. They are stored in the ECM and TCM modules, engine and transmission computers. I would think they know how long the engine ran, the rpm's, the gear changes, plenty of information for them to tell the vehicle actually ran and went somewhere, without the GPS being operational. In the mountains it may be easier to put that data on a map, like lower gears going up a hill, how long he coasted and then engine revved up, It would be different driving than in a more 'flatter' area. Those kind of events are always recorded ,mechanics use that info now and the vehicle will not operate if they are disabled.
Being a diesel, the exhaust contents were more than likely being recorded as well. Dig into a well known VW case and you can see how much info is actually recorded, but possibly not much info on opening doors and location from the operational computers.

Just some thoughts here that, IMO, I would think they know the truck/vehicle was used regardless of GPS data.

 

[Scootie98]

Y'all did good work overnight.

Voting. Point being, Suzanne DIDN'T get a vote (about what she wore, did, ate, never mind politically). She was probably NEVER free to vote contrary to him, if she so wanted (at least not without having to lie).

The truck. We heard about Barry's PHONE being places on the morning of 5/9. Did his truck GPS sync with that? Must have.

So the question is, what benefit did Barry attempt to gain with the reset and did he get it?

It seems that LE didn't know about the Garfield run except for the turn signal indicator. And the 18 mile discrepancy.

Barry apparently tried to account for the miles by saying he went to town (the mechanical thingy and/or the spa store) and tried to account for the left turn by inventing an elk herd. No sale.

So it remains, what did he reset it for?

Did he do it so he'd be set for a morning drive up to Garfield? Forgot he'd be moving the truck that evening (backing it up 95 feet)? He clearly had no idea (who would?!) that his truck would record every door event!

Did Barry reset the truck system to hide his planned trip up to Garfield? Seems like a lot of monkey business just to stage one helmet.

How does LE know he backed the truck up, 95 feet? It recorded reverse in his driveway for a timed period? and .... forward the next day? They had GPS for the driveway but not Garfield? It's got to be that, right? Drive time, direction (forward and reverse) but NOT geolocation! LE did not know he went as far as Garfield until he told them! So maybe he went somewhere else just without using his turn signal!!! He did seem to know he'd want one generally seamless drive to Broomfield. (Did he think they wouldn't notice that he spent more time at dumpsters that doing work?)

What was he doing???? It was worth the detour and didn't require exiting the car but was also worth the trouble of wiping or blocking the GPS.

It had to be critical to his cover.

What was it?????

He gives me a headache.

JMO

the where and why of the missing 18 miles is a mystery....but was it identified when the 18 miles went missing?

 

[FromGermany1]

the where and why of the missing 18 miles is a mystery....but was it identified when the 18 miles went missing?

I also don't remember, WHEN exactly the 18 miles got lost somehow.
Can it be, he met SD? Can it be, SHE dumped the helmet for him and he didn't have to drive to this place? (As a cleaning lady, she has a lot of rubber gloves available. ) BM met her first time in Oct 2020, so he remembers until he remembers differently. Do we have to assume, her car data were read out for the time around the murder/disappearing?

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

You wonderful sleuthers are much more skilled than I at this.

I’m wondering if Barry offered Grusing an explanation for his vehicle resets? Or if you remember him discussing it in AA?

 

[CGray123]

Thinking further about the motion for recusal, I feel the "360 lines of discovery" is illustrative of how the defence is trying to blur the line between how this might be a bad witness for them (where the judge OKed the warrant) and the supposed grounds for recusal (the law firm connection).

A search warrant was executed, and the state must disclose everything - that doesn't mean there are 360 lines of items of evidence that will be introduced in respect of this witness. And in any case, it is the defence that can/will contest that evidence - not the witness?

Remember this is a prosecution witness, so therefore it will be the state that will attempt to introduce search warrant evidence. The defence is the party that can certainly oppose it. It would seem odd to me that a prosecution witness would lead arguments by independent counsel against the prosecution's evidence - does she have standing to do this? I don't know.

I rather get the feeling this is an attempt via the backdoor to suggest the Judge has a bias based on the granting of the warrants rather than on the actual grounds for recusal in the other case.

The defence claims that the Judge will supposedly have to rule on all kinds of issues where the SD's counsel will be an active participant, but I do wonder how real that is. Won't those issues come from the defence?

I guess the judge will be looking into rules of procedure and precedent here

ETA: as I understand it, as a witness before a federal grand jury, you cannot have counsel present (i.e they are an adviser only). At trial, it's an open proceeding so the witness may have counsel present for advice (e.g taking the 5th) but I don't see that counsel could object to a question for example.

We'll need the actual Colorado procedure i guess.

You raise interesting questions in this and other posts! IMO, Judge M having acknowledged that his personal relationship with SD's firm was so significant that he had to disqualify himself in her case, will have a tough time explaining a contrary result in BM's case. Whatever ulterior motives may be working in the minds of BM and his defenders, his decision will depend on that issue. Under Rule 21, he cannot preemptively decide that SD has no standing to question the seizure of her stuff BEFORE he decides the disqualification issue.

If the judge is inclined to sail as close to the ethical wind as defense counsel, he might say, "BM's motion is not timely and is dismissed for that reason. Also, my good friend's firm has not entered an appearance in BM's case so there is no disqualification issue in current circumstances. Unless and until that changes, I will continue to preside in the BM case."

Put it back on SM's defense counsel. The risk is that the circumstances will arise just before trial, forcing the appointment of a new judge with insufficient time to prepare. I don't see Judge M playing chicken with defense counsel that way. He wants a fair trial with no reversible error, and the safe course seems to ask the SC to appoint a replacement now. MOO, of course.

 

[Megnut]

We don't have any answer he may have given regarding the reset. So they didn't record his answer in the AA or it went straight to a "don't recall".

I'm surprised no squirrels chewed through it, 100%.

JMO

LE has a record apparently of every single start up. I imagine but don't know that he started the truck that morning in the driveway and didn't turn it off until he arrived at

 

[Momofthreeboys]

You raise interesting questions in this and other posts! IMO, Judge M having acknowledged that his personal relationship with SD's firm was so significant that he had to disqualify himself in her case, will have a tough time explaining a contrary result in BM's case. Whatever ulterior motives may be working in the minds of BM and his defenders, his decision will depend on that issue. Under Rule 21, he cannot preemptively decide that SD has no standing to question the seizure of her stuff BEFORE he decides the disqualification issue.

If the judge is inclined to sail as close to the ethical wind as defense counsel, he might say, "BM's motion is not timely and is dismissed for that reason. Also, my good friend's firm has not entered an appearance in BM's case so there is no disqualification issue in current circumstances. Unless and until that changes, I will continue to preside in the BM case. Put it back on SM's defense counsel. The risk is that the circumstances will arise just before trial, forcing the appointment of a new judge with insufficient time to prepare. I don't see Judge M playing chicken with defense counsel that way. He wants a fair trial with no reversible error, and the safe course seems to ask the SC to appoint a replacement now. MOO, of course.

All super interesting. I was wondering if he asks prosecution to dismiss the trespass charge if that would alleviate the conflict. That seems like the simplest solution. That charge in my opinion was handled very out of the norm anyway and the judge knows it I'm sure. Most people who trespass on a particular property for the first time get a warning I would hazard a guess in any state in the US. No one will ever convince me that LE didn't use the tresspass opportunity for another fishing expedition into SD's involvement with BM.

 

[CGray123]

All super interesting. I was wondering if he asks prosecution to dismiss the trespass charge if that would alleviate the conflict. That seems like the simplest solution. That charge in my opinion was handled very out of the norm anyway and the judge knows it I'm sure. Most people who trespass on a particular property for the first time get a warning I would hazard a guess in any state in the US. No one will ever convince me that LE didn't use the tresspass opportunity for another fishing expedition into SD's involvement with BM.

The alleged "interest or prejudice" involving SM's attorneys relates to their possible role in BM's case, so I don't see the possible dismissal of the trespass charge against her as removing that question.

I do think LE had a good public safety reason to arrest and prosecute her on the trespass charge because of the unusual circumstances. BM was under restrictions on access to guns. Was he seeking to evade those restrictions with her assistance? Was this a trial run, seeing whether indirect delivery of ghost gun parts could be accomplished? LE may have had other reasons to go after her including her lack of cooperation in a murder case (deleting phone messages) which are legitimate IMO. The DA says she'll be called as a witness against BM, so I infer that some of the docs they retrieved are worth introducing through her testimony.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

The alleged "interest or prejudice" involving SM's attorneys relates to their possible role in BM's case, so I don't see the possible dismissal of the trespass charge against her as removing that question.

I do think LE had a good public safety reason to arrest and prosecute her on the trespass charge because of the unusual circumstances. BM was under restrictions on access to guns. Was he seeking to evade those restrictions with her assistance? Was this a trial run, seeing whether indirect delivery of ghost gun parts could be accomplished? LE may have had other reasons to go after her including her lack of cooperation in a murder case (deleting phone messages) which are legitimate IMO. The DA says she'll be called as a witness against BM, so I infer that some of the docs they retrieved are worth introducing through her testimony.

You may be right although I don't agree with the "unusual" circumstances once they knew the facts...they wanted to dig more into her info I will believe until my last breath -- if she was any other local running over to get it for Barry there would have been no arrest in my opinion..alittle mellow dramatic on my choice of words perhaps LOL

 

[10ofRods]

The alleged "interest or prejudice" involving SM's attorneys relates to their possible role in BM's case, so I don't see the possible dismissal of the trespass charge against her as removing that question.

I do think LE had a good public safety reason to arrest and prosecute her on the trespass charge because of the unusual circumstances. BM was under restrictions on access to guns. Was he seeking to evade those restrictions with her assistance? Was this a trial run, seeing whether indirect delivery of ghost gun parts could be accomplished? LE may have had other reasons to go after her including her lack of cooperation in a murder case (deleting phone messages) which are legitimate IMO. The DA says she'll be called as a witness against BM, so I infer that some of the docs they retrieved are worth introducing through her testimony.

That's an intriguing speculation (that SD's package retrieval skills were needed in order for BM to receive contraband of some kind). No sane group of LE would just ignore that behavior.

Can't wait for SD's testimony at trial (or, for that matter, CC's).

 

[HongKongPhooey]

That's an intriguing speculation (that SD's package retrieval skills were needed in order for BM to receive contraband of some kind). No sane group of LE would just ignore that behavior.

Can't wait for SD's testimony at trial (or, for that matter, CC's).

Me too. I'm hoping that SD will be the hot head loose cannon she appears to be .

JMO

 

[sk716]

From Tumbleweed at end of last thread:
"BM above. I respectfully disagree. I was just looking at the telematics data on page 128 of the AA, and the last entry states that the truck moved 96.8 feet from the garage to the driveway. So that is the 2nd reference in the AA that refers to the truck being in the garage. I think he pulled the truck into the garage with the trailer sticking out into the driveway. Yes, it's totally bizarre and why the heck would he do that? "

If there was space amongst the rafters in the garage - above the cars - for storage (such as where the missing coolers were kept?) could BM have not gotten out a ladder but just used the trailer to stand on and reach up for something?

Also @Tumbleweed

The AA is full of typos and contradictory info, not all of it from Barry. As I said before, I based the timeline on the most detailed lines and comparing it to PH tweets. Barry Morphew Redacted Arrest Affidavit – Find Suzanne Morphew

Check the GPS of where Barry began his chipmunk chase. He didn't start it in the garage. He pulled in with the trailer attached. At 16:44 he unhooked the trailer and pulled the truck into the garage. At 21:25 he backed the 96 feet out of the garage.

http://www.🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/BarrysChipmunkChase.jpg

If he had started in the garage he wouldn't have needed to detour there to get the tranqs from his workbench (#4).

http://www.🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/BarrysChipmunkChasept3.jpg
Screencap CBS Denver