Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #89

[genuineusa77]

Didn't the defense also try to say that per the bodycam video of the investigator that they could HEAR what sounded like the investigator dropping the dart sheath? In other words, they tried to say he planted it by dropping it inside the dryer and the sound would be the sheath hitting the inside (drum) of the dryer. I'm not trying to say that it was planted, I'm just saying that if it was found in the vent or lint trap that will need to be made clear to the jury in order to shut down the defense claim of it being planted.

And yes, this sheath turned out to be larger that what I was picturing based on previous descriptions.

The dart sheath had to have been found in the dryer drum. There is no way it would get sucked into a mesh filter. If they say the vent that means they took apart the hose and vent behind the dryer and it would never be there because it could not get past the mesh filter.

 

[Megnut]

Aside from the sunglasses, I'm curious about the items on the front seat of the Range Rover. Didn't they use the Range Rover for Moonlight pizza Friday night including eating pizza in the Range Rover? I find it odd that the Camelback and the other items would have found their way to the front seat after pizza. Did Barry sit in the back seat during this outing? Suzanne's bike would've been in the far back at this time also, right?

IMO

I believe Suzanne had a bike rack.

IMO Suzanne was preparing to go on a bike ride. Her regular, daily, afternoon bike ride. On Saturday.

I'd love to know her Camelback habits.

We know she drove to her starting points.

When did she typically fill, empty, clean her Camelback? Where did she keep it between rides? In the car? In the house?

Did she keep all her stuff on her passenger seat? Or was it arranged in the console?

Were the chlorine bottles in the car because they were going to refill them at the spa store in conjunction with the pizza run? But it was closed? Hence the ask/request on Saturday morning?

Crime scene photos will fill in a lot of unknowns.

JMO

 

[Observer33]

I wonder if they ever used helicopters with infrared cameras to hunt for Suzanne's body?

 

[nyvictoria]

“Went though Dallas” sounds like she could have been driving rather than flying. Plus taking more than one flight and leaving a record of that might have been more suspicious than just driving. You’re probably right though.

The hotel has a valet parking service.

Map & Directions

That said, I’m quite sure LE have been checking all this stuff out. It’s interesting though. Who would have had an opportunity to touch her glovebox?

It could be someone who worked on the car. It could be from Suzanne touching something that had DNA from someone. There are so many ways it could have found its way there.

Keep in mind that the DNA is a partial match, which is not a match at all. It might match someone in this person’s family. It might not. It might match someone in my family or yours. IMO the term partial match is misleading. It really means nothing.

 

[charminglane]

It could be someone who worked on the car. It could be from Suzanne touching something that had DNA from someone. There are so many ways it could have found its way there.

Keep in mind that the DNA is a partial match, which is not a match at all. It might match someone in this person’s family. It might not. It might match someone in my family or yours. IMO the term partial match is misleading. It really means nothing.

So clearly explained!

 

[Trebor5591]

No. Skip town, get hid buy his friends.

He's not going to skip bail and flee. Why would he, when he will likely be acquitted? Plus, he has to know he would be caught were he to flee.
Here is what I see as the reasons for his future acquittal:
1) There is no significant evidence against him, just speculation, plus the contradictions in his own words.
2) the victim is no longer a sympathetic figure because of her affair with a married man with children. The jury won't like this at all.
3) the support of his daughters will mean something to a jury. The theory that his daughters are "brainwashed" into supporting him is not credible.
4) The unknown male partial DNA found in her vehicle, linked to sex crimes, creates mountains of reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury.

Working against his acquittal are the many interviews he has given. He has talked so much that it won't be difficult to find contradictions. But will those contradictions be enough to override the lack of evidence and the reasonable doubt caused because of the DNA? I don't believe so.

Morphew murder case: DNA found in missing Colorado woman's car matches partial samples from unsolved sex assaults

 

[Love Never Fails]

Unrelated to the evidence, but knowing that Barry cast a ballot in her name after Suzanne's "disappearance" tips the scales for me. He did it.

Hey LinusK. Good to see you. There is so much that points to Barry. His own actions and all his made up stories. Incredibly stupid and incredibly arrogant.
Although we have discussed BM voting in her name (months after her death), we placed it on a back burner. Like I said, he is incredibly stupid.

ETA: in reading down further, I see Mass Guy had already covered Barry being stupid and arrogant. Guess it’s apparent to all of us.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

It could be someone who worked on the car. It could be from Suzanne touching something that had DNA from someone. There are so many ways it could have found its way there.

Keep in mind that the DNA is a partial match, which is not a match at all. It might match someone in this person’s family. It might not. It might match someone in my family or yours. IMO the term partial match is misleading. It really means nothing.

At this point we are really going to need to wait until trial. It is going to be a major issue that needs to be managed by both sides for sure. It will be a pivot point for a jury if prosecution cannot eliminate it to their satisfaction. For me these types of issues: was the needle sheath planted, is the truck data accurate, is the DNA a non-issue are reasons why I struggled with prosecution going after Murder 1 instead of a lesser charge. Getting a jury to be unanimous on Murder 1 is going to be harder than getting a jury to agree on a crime of passion. All the elements for crime of passion are evident in my opinion which is why I can wait for the trial to see if my opinion changes on Murder 1. I still believe this is not a slam dunk unanimous quick decision for a jury at this point in time.

 

[DeDee]

In case anyone missed last night's viewing, here is a link to the program.

Watch 48 Hours Season 34 Episode 20: The Suzanne Morphew Case: Nothing Is What It Seems - Full show on CBS

 

[Love Never Fails]

He's not going to skip bail and flee. Why would he, when he will likely be acquitted? Plus, he has to know he would be caught were he to flee.
Here is what I see as the reasons for his future acquittal:
1) There is no significant evidence against him, just speculation, plus the contradictions in his own words.
2) the victim is no longer a sympathetic figure because of her affair with a married man with children. The jury won't like this at all.
3) the support of his daughters will mean something to a jury. The theory that his daughters are "brainwashed" into supporting him is not credible.
4) The unknown male partial DNA found in her vehicle, linked to sex crimes, creates mountains of reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury.

Working against his acquittal are the many interviews he has given. He has talked so much that it won't be difficult to find contradictions. But will those contradictions be enough to override the lack of evidence and the reasonable doubt caused because of the DNA? I don't believe so.

Morphew murder case: DNA found in missing Colorado woman's car matches partial samples from unsolved sex assaults

You made some good points. Those points also point to his guilt. He had motive. He had means. He had opportunity. And he lies every time he opens his mouth. The DNA will be explained by the Prosecution. Surely we aren’t living back in the day of OJ Simpson.
I do not believe his youngest daughter is brainwashed. I do believe her older sister was closer to her dad and she could be trying to persuade her now. Some jurors may not be sympathetic to Suzanne but I’m willing to bet many of them have made errors in their lives that they wouldn’t want to be murdered for. In the end, I believe Barry will be convicted.

I agree he won’t likely run while $500k is being held and his arrogance makes him believe his two excellent lawyers will win the day for him. They won’t.

 

[nyvictoria]

At this point we are really going to need to wait until trial. It is going to be a major issue that needs to be managed by both sides for sure. It will be a pivot point for a jury if prosecution cannot eliminate it to their satisfaction. For me these types of issues: was the needle sheath planted, is the truck data accurate, is the DNA a non-issue are reasons why I struggled with prosecution going after Murder 1 instead of a lesser charge. Getting a jury to be unanimous on Murder 1 is going to be harder than getting a jury to agree on a crime of passion. All the elements for crime of passion are evident in my opinion which is why I can wait for the trial to see if my opinion changes on Murder 1. I still believe this is not a slam dunk unanimous quick decision for a jury at this point in time.

I agree that the DNA may be an issue. Touch DNA can throw a monkey wrench into the most exhaustive investigation. The State will have to thoroughly explain how common it is to find random DNA everywhere, not just at a crime scene. They’ll have to show that there’s no evidence of this person’s DNA on the bike, the helmet or anywhere else in this case. The jury will have to understand that it’s just background noise. I wonder if the State can motion to have it excluded?

 

[DizzyB]

I’m going to need more info on the partial DNA match. The 48 hours piece sounded like the defense believes that the prosecution withheld vital information regarding that match, and there will be a hearing regarding that evidence. Maybe I interpreted it wrong, but that’s how it sounded to me.

I do hope that the prosecution uses this time to get to the bottom of identifying that DNA using any possible means. I think it’s important to the case to rule out the SO as a suspect. Close that hole.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I’m going to need more info on the partial DNA match. The 48 hours piece sounded like the defense believes that the prosecution withheld vital information regarding that match, and there will be a hearing regarding that evidence. Maybe I interpreted it wrong, but that’s how it sounded to me.

I do hope that the prosecution uses this time to get to the bottom of identifying that DNA using any possible means. I think it’s important to the case to rule out the SA as a suspect. Close that hole.

That is my understanding…that prosecution had more information on the dna and potentially other info prior to the preliminary but delivered some late and withheld some things from defense until after and yes it is one of the motions. I think this is the issue that caused the subpoena of Jeff Lindsay and is part of the intent to sue letter. I also think this is why an appeals attorney specialist was brought onto the team so early. Defense is certainly convinced something is amuck or was amuck in the DAs office. So these motions hearings should be of great interest.

 

[LaborDayRN]

So I just tried an experiment. My cousin and her boyfriend were here to watch football, and after the game I convinced them to watch 48 Hours with me, and said I wanted their opinion of this case.

This couple are both in early 60's and are perfect examples of typical jurors. He is a retired businessman/store owner, she's a retired high school teacher. She taught Social Studies so she was very into this experiment. Joe was less enthusiastic but did go along with it and he did watch the show and had valid feedback.

Unfortunately, at the end, they both agreed that Barry was loathsome, but they were leaning towards 'reasonable doubt' ----mainly because of 2 issues. The DNA in the glove box AND the possibility she ran off.

I was very surprised they believed she may have voluntarily left---but they felt that Barry was such a jerk and the girls were grown, AND Barry seemed so close to 'his girls' ---they wondered if she felt left out and went to start a new life. It surprised me because I never thought a reasonable person would believe that---but these 2 people are intelligent and reasonable.

The DNA---I understand why that threw them a bit. The way the show depicted it, does make it appear as though a level 3 sex offender was in her passenger seat. HOPEFULLY the prosecution can clarify that for the real jury.

We did have Pizza and a few beers, so that might have affected their decisions...

This is also my fear with the jury. However, one thing in the above experiment is missing and that is a prosecutor with an ace expert witness to explain away the DNA.

 

[Boxer]

He's not going to skip bail and flee. Why would he, when he will likely be acquitted? Plus, he has to know he would be caught were he to flee.
Here is what I see as the reasons for his future acquittal:
1) There is no significant evidence against him, just speculation, plus the contradictions in his own words.
2) the victim is no longer a sympathetic figure because of her affair with a married man with children. The jury won't like this at all.
3) the support of his daughters will mean something to a jury. The theory that his daughters are "brainwashed" into supporting him is not credible.
4) The unknown male partial DNA found in her vehicle, linked to sex crimes, creates mountains of reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury.

Working against his acquittal are the many interviews he has given. He has talked so much that it won't be difficult to find contradictions. But will those contradictions be enough to override the lack of evidence and the reasonable doubt caused because of the DNA? I don't believe so.

Morphew murder case: DNA found in missing Colorado woman's car matches partial samples from unsolved sex assaults

All true.
E&N will shred them I doubt the prosecution will be so weak next time.
MOO. The DA won election in parycgiving the idea she would bring the case to trial. The PH case was obviously not as well prepared as it should hace been.

What do you mean, a "weird judge"? And who or what is "the AA"? Thanks!

Murphy was the judge that had to recuse himself from the murder case due to BLs girlfriend (not sure) coming up in a case before him.
She was arrested for trespassing onto the property of new owners of the Morphews home, saying she was getting a misdelivered package.



My opinion only, did not like his rulings found them strange.

 

[MrsWatson]

I think if the prosecution comes out strong with the explanation about the touch DNA, that whole issue can go back to what it is: random touch DNA. It was in her truck, not on the bike, not on the helmet,not in the house, not on any of BM's vehicles, not on anything else at all related to Suzanne. There is also zero evidence of the crime involving her vehicle. A good expert can explain how unlikely it would be that the touch DNA found on her vehicle, but nowhere else, had anything to do with Suzanne's disappearance.

I think the defense is trying to inflate this touch DNA into a big sticking point because they need every thing they can find. BM's own words and actions and the fingernail scratches are hard to explain away.

All MOO

 

[Trebor5591]

I agree that the DNA may be an issue. Touch DNA can throw a monkey wrench into the most exhaustive investigation. The State will have to thoroughly explain how common it is to find random DNA everywhere, not just at a crime scene. They’ll have to show that there’s no evidence of this person’s DNA on the bike, the helmet or anywhere else in this case. The jury will have to understand that it’s just background noise. I wonder if the State can motion to have it excluded?

But the DNA was found in the victims car. How did it get there? Unless perhaps she brought her vehicle to a full service car wash, that might explain it, or unless there is a police report of a theft from her vehicle, that might explain it. But the touch DNA--how likely is it that she touched something that the sex criminal touched, and then transferred it to her glove box?

 

[sk716]

Yes, I remember that. And I was hoping the prosecution was going to clarify that in re-cross but they didn't. It was left out there so it is still up for debate now.

The first two days of the PH E&N basically spent making sure nothing bad about Barry's actions got out. Eytan comes off as playing dumb on paper. Nielsen talks in circles and repeats questions, wasting time. Lindsey was really exasperated by their antics.

 

[fcavanaugh]

This case is about as clear as water to many of us following for almost two years now, and though I understand that without a thorough understanding gained from expert analysis/explanation of the DNA on SM’s vehicle glovebox leaves reasonable doubt for some, I believe once explained fully by DNA expert witnesses at trial, any critically thinking jury will understand its significance, which for me after doing some research and studying up on it, the random glovebox DNA is a nothingburger.

Random touch DNA can literally be found everywhere, and I believe there’s an innocent explanation for how it came to be on SM’s vehicle glovebox. It is my understanding that it is not the offender’s DNA that was found on the glovebox, but a potential close or distant relative of said offender whose DNA is in CODIS and which the glovebox DNA got a hit on as partial match. The person (close/distant relative of offender in CODIS) could have either worked on SM’s vehicle at some point, was a passenger in that vehicle at some point, worker at the car dealership etc, etc. Having said that as a follower of true crime for decades and someone who does research to gain an understanding and clarity on things that come up in the cases I follow, I realize most jurors probably don’t follow true crime closely and don’t have the scientific knowledge of the full meaning of DNA/DNA types (full profile, partial profile, full match, partial match, transfer DNA, touch DNA etc, etc, etc) nor its implications or weight bearing significance in cases. So from an average juror’s standpoint, I would want this glovebox DNA thoroughly explained to me, absolutely yes. As a juror, I would also take it a step further and would want to know the following: was this same DNA found anywhere else at the scene- inside house, outside on patio/patio furniture, etc? Was this same DNA found on the bike? Was this same DNA found on the helmet? Because to believe some crazed random abductor and/or serial rapist killer ambushed/abducted/killed SM and either left the scene with an alive, struggling Suzanne or if he raped and killed her and left the scene with her dead body and throughout doing all that to include staging a bike and helmet and only managed to get his DNA on her vehicle glovebox and nowhere else, defies credulity and logic. IOW, as a juror, I would want to see other corroborating evidence that the same contributing DNA found on the vehicle glovebox was found in other places at the crime scene as well as on the staged bike and helmet which to my knowledge, the rando glovebox DNA was not found in any other places at the scene nor on the bike or helmet. If it were, you can bet it would’ve been brought up by E&N by now and they’d have already motioned case and all charges dismissed if that same DNA was found in any other locations at the scene as well as on the bike and helmet.

No doubt, E&N are masters at what they do, and they are using this random glovebox DNA to plant reasonable doubt in minds of future jurors. So far, it seems to be working but once explained clearly and thoroughly by experts to jurors at trial, I think most smart, critically thinking jurors will be able to see it’s insignificance/irrelevance and will be able to see/conclude that all roads and totality of the mountain of evidence leads to one conclusion BARD of responsible perpetrator.

I’m not saying it will be easy for the potential jury or that it is a slam dunk, no. It is obviously different to know vs. prove BARD in court, and especially with DC E&N, the prosecution most definitely needs to bring their A-game to trial to help the jury understand the evidence and be able to connect the dots of the mountain of circumstantial evidence against BM, and have one heck of a convincing closing argument that not only speaks to the weight of the totality of all the evidence against BM, that also drives home the point that no one had the motive, means and opportunity nor anything to gain from SM’s murder, except the defendant, her husband, BM.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

 

[Momofthreeboys]

The first two days of the PH E&N basically spent making sure nothing bad about Barry's actions got out. Eytan comes off as playing dumb on paper. Nielsen talks in circles and repeats questions, wasting time. Lindsey was really exasperated by their antics.

In your opinion he was exasperated. For me he came off as a thorough contemplative person who was managing the courtroom. He of all people knew the tip went to prosecution and knew defense strategy would be to ensure their client got bail by ensuring prosecution didn’t meet proof positive presumption great. This was never going to be a simple preliminary in my opinion and he had seen and signed off on the arrest warrant. His decision to proceed with trial and to say the prosecution did not meet proof positive presumption great was again in my opinion spot on. I really think negativity with the judge for some was that he didn’t put the hammer down, say the case met the burden to keep Barry in jail. I was sorry to see him leave the case since he had been there since the arrest warrant.