Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #95

[CGray123]

Im not trying to be funny. The constitution protects the accused, not so much the victim. That often seems unfair, but it is what it is. As of now BM is only accused of SM’s murder, so all the constitutional protections apply.

If texts or 0r her list are allowed in, how does the defense defend against some one they can not cross examine. That seems very unfair to the victim, SM, but the protections are for the accused, BM.

take for example SM stating BM is a narcissist. What does she mean by narcissist. Is her understanding the same as yours, mine, the 12 jurors? Does she have examples of what he did/does to show he is a narcissist? How can anyone know without asking her?

How can BM’s defense defend against past written/texted statement from SM, without her being there to ask?

This is all IMHO. I may be wrong. As the law is so complicated at times even attorneys get it wrong, it’s even likely that I am.

There are specific criteria under which the victim's hearsay statement can be admitted despite the lack of confrontation, but Judge L found those conditions were not met with respect to the past physical abuse. The key elements are probative value, relevance, and reliability.

 

[Scootie98]

Same.
BM really really really wants those LE officers to know he has sex.

Recall when Barry made the comment to Grusing and his partner..."we three have alot in common"? or words to that effect. He actually thought some male bonding was going on there...akin to that which you would find at the fire station.

 

[Love Never Fails]

It appears most think Suzanne’s affair was the trigger for Barry killing her. I do believe if he found her texting JL or taking a nude selfie that would have triggered him at that moment.

But what most aren’t talking about is what I believe was the main motive: money. Barry didn’t want to split what they had but I believe evidence might come into play of nefarious financial dealings. Suzanne may have found out. Maybe not. But I believe he planned and premeditated her murder for a long time. If so, I think there will be some surprises at trial.

 

[Scootie98]

Any thoughts about BMs text to Suzanne Saturday May 9th @14:26 stating "Done, headed back?"
If he had been spying or wanting to catch her doing something why give her advance notice he was about to return home?

Also, after moving around the house phone pings show him at the master bedroom door for 2 minutes(?) then phone goes into airplane mode.
Considering the door frame is cracked I suspect he kicked it in initiating what came next.

I'm thinking SM was likely no longer outside but in the master bedroom when he arrived home so no chase throughout house.

Guessing they argued in bedroom and he lost temper and killed her. Suzanne reaching for charging phone to call for help probably precipitated charger pulled from wall then damaged.

However, when he first arrived home he ran around house into garage at which time he most likely grabbed tranquilizer, but if she wasn't outside to see, what would have caused him to grab tranquilizer before standing before locked bedroom door?
This probably doesn't make sense.
Just trying to figure this out...

I personally believe that BM let her know he was on his way while monitoring her on his phone via the cameras to see how she would react/respond to that. He wanted to know what she would do if she knew he was on his way home. After he got home....those cameras were shut off, imo.

 

[Warwick7]

It appears most think Suzanne’s affair was the trigger for Barry killing her. I do believe if he found her texting JL or taking a nude selfie that would have triggered him at that moment.

But what most aren’t talking about is what I believe was the main motive: money. Barry didn’t want to split what they had but I believe evidence might come into play of nefarious financial dealings. Suzanne may have found out. Maybe not. But I believe he planned and premeditated her murder for a long time. If so, I think there will be some surprises at trial.

I agree....In my own opinion I think he had the state of mind that she was not going to make it through her second cancer bout.

That recovery threw a wrench into his financial termoils.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

It appears most think Suzanne’s affair was the trigger for Barry killing her. I do believe if he found her texting JL or taking a nude selfie that would have triggered him at that moment.

But what most aren’t talking about is what I believe was the main motive: money. Barry didn’t want to split what they had but I believe evidence might come into play of nefarious financial dealings. Suzanne may have found out. Maybe not. But I believe he planned and premeditated her murder for a long time. If so, I think there will be some surprises at trial.

Well motive alone is not enough in a criminal murder trial absent other evidence so "motive" could be any of the things that are been discussed, but it's fairly easy for prosecution to introduce the affair and the talk of divorce although I'm puzzled by the back and forth nature of Suzanne's messages to Barry that last week so I'm voting for prosecution sticking to the affair as their "motive." The evidence and potential prosecution witnesses will be determined through the motions of what will be admissable or not.

 

[Love Never Fails]

P

I agree....In my own opinion I think he had the state of mind that she was not going to make it through her second cancer bout.

That recovery threw a wrench into his financial termoils.

Theres just something, maybe many things, we don’t yet know about. Barry’s lies and secret trips and handling money on his own, all of those things bother me. One just doesn’t have to “control” your spouse the way he did.

 

[Scootie98]

IMO this case will be decided by the electronic forensics. I hope it can be explained in a way non Techies can understand.

The rest can be riddled with reasonable doubt. BM’s old friend (SO?) who’s opinion is BM did it also said BM lies all the time and expects people just to shut up and go along with him. Reasonable doubt for all the lies he told to LE IMO.

BM controlling? 6 out of state trips by SM, a stay at home mom = Reasonable doubt.

the bike being staged because of the wheel position? A beginning rider going over the handle bars flings a bike down hill if they aren’t using clipless pedals. The front wheel position can end up anywhere.. however the no evidence of a body landing means this can go either way.

Security cameras not working. Only SM touch DNA on the cords.

Ford F-250 computer being reset? Explain how BM would know how to do that and leave partial data in the on board computer, just leaving a hole in the data time wise and not loose everything. As a juror, I’d want a demonstration. (I’m cynical and spent the last few years doing ITSecurity. I can’t figure out how you leave a hole in the data. Usually it’s all gone or none gone. Doesn’t mean it can’t be done but I’d want a demonstration.)

no gun capable of shooting the tranq dart IMO. Can you use one by hand? Do you need it to hit hard via 22 blank or air charge to inject the drug? Prove it..

@MassGuy said he thought 85 percent conviction chance. I’m closer to 45-50 %. It all depends on what evidence is allowed in and so far, we do not know what that will be.

By his own admission, BM was physically with his wife for about 14 hours after the last documented proof of life, inconjunction with unexplained communication blackouts involving multiple people whom SM was actively communicating with. Also documented are numerous false and misleading statements made during LE interviews (one small example...where he told Gene Ritter he was at the worksite with his workers...who weren't even there yet...and he was in his hotel room at that time). BM could not even recall what SM was wearing the last time he claims to have seen her alive. In reality.....Barry has no alibi.

 

[Warwick7]

I personally believe that BM let her know he was on his way while monitoring her on his phone via the cameras to see how she would react/respond to that. He wanted to know what she would do if she knew he was on his way home. After he got home....those cameras were shut off, imo.

I like how this sounds.
However, I still think she was ignoring him while she was with JL. I don't think she paid attention to that text he was coming home.

I think she was so lost in the moment being with her lover she was not cognitive of BM.
MOO is-- she just wasn't paying attention, and lost track of time.

 

[Scootie98]

BBM
On how many of those trips did he call her, stalk her, call others because he "couldn't get her" or just show up unexpectedly??

Yes, I would call this controlling. moo

Also, I would think this behavior was absolutely humiliating for Suzanne....such as the time SO was visiting with her at Puma Path and BM was peeking through the windows and got caught.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I like how this sounds.
However, I still think she was ignoring him while she was with JL. I don't think she paid attention to that text he was coming home.

I think she was so lost in the moment being with her lover she was not cognitive of BM.
MOO is-- she just wasn't paying attention, and lost track of time.

That is my guess if I had to guess. I just can't understand why they charged first degree and not voluntary manslaughter. I'm still waiting to see what prosecution has that meets the first degree burden. I personally don't "see" the malice of forethought in what prosecution has released so far.

 

[Warwick7]

I like how this sounds.
However, I still think she was ignoring him while she was with JL. I don't think she paid attention to that text he was coming home.

I think she was so lost in the moment being with her lover she was not cognitive of BM.
MOO is-- she just wasn't paying attention, and lost track of time.

And someone had brought out earlier that there is the possibility and he panicked that she said they were done, and getting really pissed that she would not pick up his calls (like 11 of them in just a few minutes) or respond to his texts.

So, when he arrived, he went around the back where he knew she was sunning herself or thought she might be.

When he came around and she wasn't there, I think he then stood outside the bedroom window and was looking in. (Lets say a nude selfie was going on).
And whatever he saw he allowed it to push him over the edge, retrieve is dart and stand (two minutes) outside the mater bedroom door. And then busting it down when she refused to let him in.

Again this is all my own personal opinion, but after hearing someone else say it earlier I can't help but think they're right.

 

[Warwick7]

Also, I would think this behavior was absolutely humiliating for Suzanne....such as the time SO was visiting with her at Puma Path and BM was peeking through the windows and got caught.

Yes Bam!! I get so engrossed in the thought process of BM that I tend to forget about the thought process of Susan.

Yes, all these things he was doing to her, would have been extremely humiliating.

 

[MrsWatson]

I've always thought money was a big motivator for Suzanne's murder because I've always thought their money was funny. Suzanne alluded to misgivings about their finances and things coming to light. (Sorry, I don't remember her exact wording.) When Suzanne was diagnosed with her second bout of cancer, I think BM became a widower in his mind. I don't think he ever expected her to survive it. I think this is reflected in his lack of support; he didn't go to her treatments, he didn't want her to use certain medications, and threatened to cancel her health insurance. None of that shows a loving, supportive spouse, regardless of what he says.

All MOO

 

[DizzyB]

You don't have to buy it. You didn't live it. The person who did is no longer here.

There is no need for ever having evidence of his affair.

That's not what made him kill her. It was a fact that she had the affair. That is what made him kill her. moo

I don’t know. There are so many factors. I don’t think that Barry would have given up half of anything. I think if Suzanne would have left Barry, his crafted image would have been destroyed-also unacceptable to him. Was it anger about an affair? But I am intrigued most by what Barry’s thoughts might be about Suzanne leaving G-d. Did he believe he was saving Suzanne for eternity?

 

[MassGuy]

That is my guess if I had to guess. I just can't understand why they charged first degree and not voluntary manslaughter. I'm still waiting to see what prosecution has that meets the first degree burden. I personally don't "see" the malice of forethought in what prosecution has released so far.

If he accidentally killed Suzanne by behaving recklessly, then her body should still be there. There was nothing reckless here, which is why no pathetically weak manslaughter charge.

He shouldn't have been creeping around the backyard looking for a long dead turkey, hours before (when they were supposed to be eating soup).

There should not be a tranquilizer cap in the dryer, an insane story involving chipmunks, and an absurd lie about tranquillizing deer the previous month (with a non working gun).

Both of these events can be used to justify the first degree murder charge, especially the second, as it takes time to prepare (chemical must be loaded into dart).

 

[Momofthreeboys]

If he accidentally killed Suzanne by behaving recklessly, then her body should still be there. There was nothing reckless here, which is why no pathetically weak manslaughter charge.

He shouldn't have been creeping around the backyard looking for a long dead turkey, hours before (when they were supposed to be eating soup).

There should not be a tranquilizer cap in the dryer, an insane story involving chipmunks, and an absurd lie about tranquillizing deer the previous month (with a non working gun).

Both of these events can be used to justify the first degree murder charge, especially the second, as it takes time to prepare (chemical must be loaded into dart).

If you believe the dart theory that works, but I have serious questions about that. I could envision a scenario of exploding in a moment of rage and then running around getting the body moved either by him or with help. But it is all still alittle sketchy for me and not quite crystallized.

 

[CGray123]

To the extent SM's texts and social media posts are admitted for a purpose other than to prove the truth of the statements she made, BM can have the judge instruct the jury as follows:

1:11 EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE ONLY

In certain instances evidence may be admitted for a limited purpose only. (Exhibit [insert identification]) (Witness [name]’s testimony [you are about to hear] [you have just heard]) is such an instance. It may be used as evidence for the purpose of showing (insert description), but you should not consider it as evidence for any other purpose.

Whether E&N will ask for this instruction for every statement is a matter of trial tactics. Some attorneys believe pausing for this instruction highlights the importance of the testimony and does not affect the jury's deliberations to any significant degree.

 

[CGray123]

Many of the assertions expressed on this site (pro and con) are vague and speculative in nature. Here's how the judge will instruct the jury as to such thinking:

3:4 NO SPECULATION

Any finding of fact you make must be based on probabilities, not possibilities. You should not guess or speculate about a fact.

 

[Seattle1]

Many of the assertions expressed on this site (pro and con) are vague and speculative in nature. Here's how the judge will instruct the jury as to such thinking:

3:4 NO SPECULATION

Any finding of fact you make must be based on probabilities, not possibilities. You should not guess or speculate about a fact.

Respectfully, Jury instructions in Criminal cases are often argued by the defense and prosecution before being tendered to the jurors. They're not delivered in a vacuum without a basis or understanding of use.

From the link (CIVIL Jury Instructions):

3:4 No Speculation continued.........

Notes on Use

Although the prohibition against surmise, speculation or conjecture is applicable to all issues on which a party may have the burden of proof, it is frequently referred to on issues of damages. The prohibition does not mean, however, that damages must be established with absolute certainty. See Instruction 5:6; Palmer v. Diaz, 214 P.3d 546 (Colo. App 2009) (difficulty in assessing damages does not preclude damages award).

ETA: CRIMINAL Jury Instructions linked downthread.