Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #94

[Cassady]

This was a great article that answered so many questions I've had about cadaver dogs. Thank you for sharing!

"Dogs are able to pick up a scent within minutes of the death or years later. In some studies, they have found 25-year-old skeletonized remains, buried in an area of 300 by 150 feet. Hurst works with a volunteer group, NecroSearch International, Inc., that brings together specialists from many disciplines—everything from botany, anthropology, and entomology to computer analysis—to help law enforcement solve decades-old cases. Canine sniffers are important in many of these searches."


I know NecroSearch was used in SM's investigation.

JMO

DOGS RULE...IMO

 

[sk716]

Are cadaver dogs able to detect corpses buried under ground, in water or in a cave or mine?

If so, this pick your own ending theory about the victim being in a mine or anywhere nearby the house is not very solid and I doubt the State is going to float this at trial considering the extent of the searches that were conducted early on in the case....IMO.

Questions can be the death nail in criminal cases...too many questions about the state's case usually means mistrial or acquittal.

IMO

Why would the state float it? It's not even something they've discussed. The State has made zero inference as to what physically happened to Suzanne's remains.

 

[Cassady]

Do you think playing the entire recorded interviews helps or hurts the prosecution? Is the defense trying to bore the jury and hope they zone out on key points? Is the entire audio likely to make him look better because it all can't be as bad as the key points they noted?

I recall at the time the AA was written the RR telematics were not completed yet. I am assuming the defense requested those at some point after that? Is there a reasonable time for which the defense has to be provided those items? Is it as soon as the prosecution has them or a certain amount of time before trial?

I guess I want to believe the best in people (heck I even believed Barry could be innocent until the release of the AA and well I can't hold on to that possibility after reading the things he lied about, both important and really unimportant details) so I assume that if evidence exists that suggests someone was in and out of the RR or moving it after 530am, then they wouldn't be pursuing charges against Barry or at the very least they would be looking for an accomplice. Why would they withhold evidence on purpose?

The defendant's statements are the cornerstone to the State's case. So, the state wants to at least get in the statements presented in the AA. Whatever they get in benefits their case.

As a rule, if I can get favorable statements from a defendant/client in front of the jury without the person testifying and being subject to C-X, I let it in.

The defense wants them all played and IMO the judge will allow it. This will include, the good, the bad and the ugly from the defendant. The defense will try to use some parts of his statements to minimize the parts that were cherry picked for the AA. They will compare any digital data to the defendant's statements which could create questions or confusion.

And yes listening to 30 hours of statements will numb most people's minds, so this may be a factor too. A mobbed up attorney who was one of my mentors gave me some great advice about juries:

"Never use powerpoint in your closing. Whenever the government turns the lights down and powerpoint on, the juries eyes glaze over and you know you have a chance to win the case." There is something to be said about the strategy of working short attention spans.

Now, if these tapes are played in their entirety for the jury, it will likelybe in the state's case in chief. If a bunch of that is pointless and only small bits have relevance, the jury will be asking why the state wasted all thier time. They will not be aware of the pre-trial wrangling by the law-dogs about this issue and the state will get the stink-eye from the jury for wasting time.

What I am certain will not happen is the defendant taking the stand at trial. Everything that comes from him will be in those statements.

As far as discovery issues, it sounds like the judge ordered that the data from the victim's RR and other items be turned over within 14 days of the last hearing.

I am not sure what is going on with discovery, but it does appear that the state has been sandbagging on turning over some evidence. However, the judge has not sanctioned anyone that I am aware of, so they may have cause or reason for the delays.

IMO, in a case like this the state needs to shoot straight with discovery issues and avoid creating uneccessary appeal issues.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Do you think playing the entire recorded interviews helps or hurts the prosecution? Is the defense trying to bore the jury and hope they zone out on key points? Is the entire audio likely to make him look better because it all can't be as bad as the key points they noted?

I recall at the time the AA was written the RR telematics were not completed yet. I am assuming the defense requested those at some point after that? Is there a reasonable time for which the defense has to be provided those items? Is it as soon as the prosecution has them or a certain amount of time before trial?

I guess I want to believe the best in people (heck I even believed Barry could be innocent until the release of the AA and well I can't hold on to that possibility after reading the things he lied about, both important and really unimportant details) so I assume that if evidence exists that suggests someone was in and out of the RR or moving it after 530am, then they wouldn't be pursuing charges against Barry or at the very least they would be looking for an accomplice. Why would they withhold evidence on purpose?

My guess was that playing the entire conversation gives context to some of Barry’s statements that we have seen snipped in the AA and through motions. Defense would not ask I don’t think unless the snips aren’t as “valuable” when in context.

 

[Cassady]

Why would the state float it? It's not even something they've discussed. The State has made zero inference as to what physically happened to Suzanne's remains.

Other than the charge related to the defendant doing something to the victims body?

 

[sk716]

So, I plugged some of the other evidence photos into relevant sections of the AA. And some folks mentioned looking for something in the AA, but they didn't have the right keywords and now its in the previous pages, but it's a really good idea to plug a keyword in where it's hard to find. Like the details of stalking SO and Suzanne, so I added a helper.

Ex:

A plastic hypodermic cover (Item 41), collected from the dryer, was tested by CBI for DNA. A low-level partial DNA mixture of two people was recovered, with Suzanne and REDACTED being possible contributors. Barry was excluded as a contributor. [Added by webmaster, Keyword: needle sheath]​

Barry Morphew Redacted Arrest Affidavit – Find Suzanne Morphew

So, lets work up a quick list of these items and the keywords we need to find them so I can make this thing even easier to find the data.

 

[sk716]

Other than the charge related to the defendant doing something to the victims body?

I can't speak to the laws of CO specifically, they seem to get a lot of these no body homicides, but the fact that there is no body is pretty strong evidence that he tampered with it.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

The defendant's statements are the cornerstone to the State's case. So, the state wants to at least get in the statements presented in the AA. Whatever they get in benefits their case.

As a rule, if I can get favorable statements from a defendant/client in front of the jury without the person testifying and being subject to C-X, I let it in.

The defense wants them all played and IMO the judge will allow it. This will include, the good, the bad and the ugly from the defendant. The defense will try to use some parts of his statements to minimize the parts that were cherry picked for the AA. They will compare any digital data to the defendant's statements which could create questions or confusion.

And yes listening to 30 hours of statements will numb most people's minds, so this may be a factor too. A mobbed up attorney who was one of my mentors gave me some great advice about juries:

"Never use powerpoint in your closing. Whenever the government turns the lights down and powerpoint on, the juries eyes glaze over and you know you have a chance to win the case." There is something to be said about the strategy of working short attention spans.

Now, if these tapes are played in their entirety for the jury, it will likelybe in the state's case in chief. If a bunch of that is pointless and only small bits have relevance, the jury will be asking why the state wasted all thier time. They will not be aware of the pre-trial wrangling by the law-dogs about this issue and the state will get the stink-eye for wasting time.

What I am certain will not happen is the defendant taking the stand at trial. Everything that comes from him will be in those statements.

As far as discovery issues, it sounds like the judge ordered that the data from the victim's RR and other items be turned over with 14 days of the last hearing.

I am not sure what is going on with discovery, but it does appear that the state has been sandbagging on turning over some evidence. However, the judge has not sanctioned anyone that I am aware of, so they may have cause or reason for the delays.

IMO, in a case like this the state needs to shoot straight with discovery issues and avoid creating uneccessary appeal issues.

Both Murphy and Lama have set aside sanctions for a later date. It made me wonder if they have serious doubts about this case so are leaving sanctions as a courtesy to prosecutors pending what is happening now with any potential exculpatory evidence. Just wondering…if say worse case is the case is dropped by prosecution until they have more concrete evidence that isn’t hearsay or character assassinstion… no sanctions needed.

 

[Cassady]

I can't speak to the laws of CO specifically, they seem to get a lot of these no body homicides, but the fact that there is no body is pretty strong evidence that he tampered with it.

And if the state proceeds to trial with this count they will have to present a logical theory of what the defendant did to be guilty . That theory will have to jibe with the timelines established by the digital data.

Within this timeframe the state will have to convince the jury that the defendant had time to kill the victim and dispose of the body so that it could not be found and without creating any forensic evidence.

If the state would have found forensic evidence, IMO it would have been found in the defendants' filthy truck which did not appear as if it had ever been cleaned...IMO

 

[MassGuy]

Both Murphy and Lama have set aside sanctions for a later date. It made me wonder if they have serious doubts about this case so are leaving sanctions as a courtesy to prosecutors pending what is happening now with any potential exculpatory evidence. Just wondering…if say worse case is the case is dropped by prosecution until they have more concrete evidence that isn’t hearsay or character assassinstion… no sanctions needed.

There's certainly hearsay and inflammatory character stuff, but come on, that's minor stuff that is by no means the foundation of their case.

Ignoring the evidence does not mean it does not exist.

She asked for a divorce, he lied about the state of their marriage, and deleted texts that proved this lie.

Barry was with Suzanne when her digital footprint stopped forever.

Her phone shut down just as he was leaving the house.

His phone and truck was active when he claimed to be sleeping.

He put himself at the helmet location.

He spent the day dumping trash, not working, and lying to everyone about it.

Chipmunks, Turkey, deer, elk, bears, coyote; lie after lie after lie.

One would have to believe that Suzanne went on a bike ride in a location she was not known to go, forgetting things she always brought, did so at an unusual time, and did so with a powered down phone that she never utilized that morning.

Then the bogeyman took her...

No. Not with every single thing pointing in one direction.

Barry's.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

There's certainly hearsay and inflammatory character stuff, but come on, that's minor stuff that is by no means the foundation of their case.

Ignoring the evidence does not mean it does not exist.

She asked for a divorce, he lied about the state of their marriage, and deleted texts that proved this lie.

Barry was with Suzanne when her digital footprint stopped forever.

Her phone shut down just as he was leaving the house.

His phone and truck was active when he claimed to be sleeping.

He put himself at the helmet location.

He spent the day dumping trash, not working, and lying to everyone about it.

Chipmunks, Turkey, deer, elk, bears, coyote; lie after lie after lie.

One would have to believe that Suzanne went on a bike ride in a location she was not known to go, forgetting things she always brought, did so at an unusual time, and did so with a powered down phone that she never utilized that morning.

Then the bogeyman took her...

No. Not with every single thing pointing in one direction.

Barry's.

I don’t think anyone knows how this will go including the judge. Your confidence in the outcome of this case surpasses mine…but you know that

 

[Cindizzi]

I can't speak to the laws of CO specifically, they seem to get a lot of these no body homicides, but the fact that there is no body is pretty strong evidence that he tampered with it.

Yes, the way the charge reads it could any of the acts listed.
In this case, CONCEAL would apply.
State doesn’t have to have a theory about how or where he did it, just that it stands to reason that he did something with her body. IMO

 

[MassGuy]

I don’t think anyone knows how this will go including the judge. Your confidence in the outcome of this case surpasses mine…but you know that

I have absolutely no idea how this case is going to turn out. I've never said this was a slam dunk case, as there is no way of predicting how a jury is going to see this, or how trial is going to play out.

I'm just saying that I am completely convinced of his guilt. I would bet my life on it.

 

[Megnut]

There's certainly hearsay and inflammatory character stuff, but come on, that's minor stuff that is by no means the foundation of their case.

Ignoring the evidence does not mean it does not exist.

She asked for a divorce, he lied about the state of their marriage, and deleted texts that proved this lie.

Barry was with Suzanne when her digital footprint stopped forever.

Her phone shut down just as he was leaving the house.

His phone and truck was active when he claimed to be sleeping.

He put himself at the helmet location.

He spent the day dumping trash, not working, and lying to everyone about it.

Chipmunks, Turkey, deer, elk, bears, coyote; lie after lie after lie.

One would have to believe that Suzanne went on a bike ride in a location she was not known to go, forgetting things she always brought, did so at an unusual time, and did so with a powered down phone that she never utilized that morning.

Then the bogeyman took her...

No. Not with every single thing pointing in one direction.

Barry's.

If Barry deleted those specific texts (from May 6th forward) prior to handing his phone over, well, that's suspicious.

If Barry deleted them as he received them, that's questionable.

But if Barry deleted them en masse anytime after, say, noon on Friday up through his casual hotel afternoon, prior to The Call, even a blind bat can see what that means.

Foreknowledge.

JMO

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

There's certainly hearsay and inflammatory character stuff, but come on, that's minor stuff that is by no means the foundation of their case.

Ignoring the evidence does not mean it does not exist.

She asked for a divorce, he lied about the state of their marriage, and deleted texts that proved this lie.

Barry was with Suzanne when her digital footprint stopped forever.

Her phone shut down just as he was leaving the house.

His phone and truck was active when he claimed to be sleeping.

He put himself at the helmet location.

He spent the day dumping trash, not working, and lying to everyone about it.

Chipmunks, Turkey, deer, elk, bears, coyote; lie after lie after lie.

One would have to believe that Suzanne went on a bike ride in a location she was not known to go, forgetting things she always brought, did so at an unusual time, and did so with a powered down phone that she never utilized that morning.

Then the bogeyman took her...

No. Not with every single thing pointing in one direction.

Barry's.

Didn’t Barry admit to use of a firearm at their residence during the same time Suzanne happened to disappear, never to be seen again? That’s such an odd coincidence.

 

[MassGuy]

Didn’t Barry admit to use of a firearm at their residence during the same time Suzanne happened to disappear, never to be seen again. That’s such an odd coincidence.

Yup. He's chasing chipmunks in his backyard with the chipmunk gun. Because as every hunter knows, the best way to hunt fast tiny animals, is to quickly move after them. Or something.

The defense would have you focus on the GPS data, which may or may not be accurate.

Ok, but Barry admitted to it, albeit almost a year later, when he was trying to address evidence.

Also, one does not have to be convinced that this is exactly how it occurred to believe that he murdered her at that time.

 

[eyeseestars]

Didn’t Barry admit to use of a firearm at their residence during the same time Suzanne happened to disappear, never to be seen again. That’s such an odd coincidence.

Also disposing of tranq materials. Wow, you know, what a time to clean!

 

[Megnut]

What was Barry doing in Broomfield? He's the only person who knew he didn't have the equipment and materials to do the job!

Which raises a peculiar question. If he was slated to pick MG up at 5pm to take her to Broomfield to fix the wall, what was he going to fix the wall with? Antlers?

No one ordered brick.

Was he always absent-minded? Ill-prepared? Or did his Friday/Saturday get away from him because, well, and he forgot to place the order?

I'm not sure the Prosecution even needs to make a closing argument.

One wall poster showing Suzanne's cellphone activity for MDW alongside Barry's would pretty much say it all.

Only one explanation fits.

JMO

 

[NothingSurprisesAnymore]

There's certainly hearsay and inflammatory character stuff, but come on, that's minor stuff that is by no means the foundation of their case.

Ignoring the evidence does not mean it does not exist.

She asked for a divorce, he lied about the state of their marriage, and deleted texts that proved this lie.

Barry was with Suzanne when her digital footprint stopped forever.

Her phone shut down just as he was leaving the house.

His phone and truck was active when he claimed to be sleeping.

He put himself at the helmet location.

He spent the day dumping trash, not working, and lying to everyone about it.

Chipmunks, Turkey, deer, elk, bears, coyote; lie after lie after lie.

One would have to believe that Suzanne went on a bike ride in a location she was not known to go, forgetting things she always brought, did so at an unusual time, and did so with a powered down phone that she never utilized that morning.

Then the bogeyman took her...

No. Not with every single thing pointing in one direction.

Barry's.

Can see you've discounted the alien theory

 

[justtrish]

If Barry deleted those specific texts (from May 6th forward) prior to handing his phone over, well, that's suspicious.

If Barry deleted them as he received them, that's questionable.

But if Barry deleted them en masse anytime after, say, noon on Friday up through his casual hotel afternoon, prior to The Call, even a blind bat can see what that means.

Foreknowledge.

JMO

Didn't he also delete calls? I thought he said a reason for that was "making space on his phone".. he deleted bad texts because he didn't want his girls to see them. Okay so did he ever delete any other tests or call logs other than those from Suzanne?