Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #96

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #881
Nah mine goes on the floor, but neatly lol. I wonder if they had a cleaning lady-the house was super well kept. Did Barry take his work boots off or stride through the house tracking all kinds of crap in? I look at the order of the home, everything in its place, and I feel like Suzanne took care of that stuff. By contrast, Barry’s garage, and his truck…

If you slow it down when Mullenax is following Barry into the kitchen, you can see the dust build up where the dark tile meets the wall. I'd guess this was Barry tromping dusty boots through the house multiple times a day.

 
  • #882
Tough words!

If someone murdered my wife who was definitely abducted, i feel like I would like to harm them :D

But i guess its all just a bit hypothetical!

(RSBM)
Ha! He was smart enough to change his stance with Holly (page 57).

Barry told Holly that he had an ex-FBI guy working for him and sometimes saying he had a P.I. (private investigator) working for him who charged him over $50,000.56 Once Barry told Holly and Jeff that he may have found where someone was holding Suzanne and asked Jeff to come to Colorado to "cut the guy's balls off."

I assume that Barry told investigators about this location that he amazingly discovered.

JK.
 
  • #883
http://www.[link removed]/the-peoples-exhibits/

Did some work on the Prosecutions exhibits. Any relevant info from the PH where the image was admitted has been added as a caption. Mostly the texts and hotel images. One of the admitted images never made it into the PDF, #24.
The pics are still huge click the not an X but looks like one on the pop-up and the huge original will open.

Quoting myself because it was too late to ETA.

The PH info opens if you hover over the thumbnail on the main page.
 
  • #884
Rereading the snippets of Suzanne's texts used as prosecution exhibits and I can't imagine the daughters testifying. It would be a huge gamble for the prosecution and I'm guessing defense won't want to put them through a cross examination. Reading those texts that prosecution used in exhibits I think I can understand why the daughters are sticking with their father. The revelation that Suzanne had a 2 year affair probably blew their minds, especially the older who experienced less of the arguing as it probably ramped up after she wasn't living in the house since she wanted things to return to like they were. They aren't needed to substantiate the marriage was collapsing I don't think and they add nothing to the charge that Barry murdered Suzanne on May 9 or 10 since they were far far away. You never know, but right now I don't think they will be called.
 
  • #885
  • #886
Rereading the snippets of Suzanne's texts used as prosecution exhibits and I can't imagine the daughters testifying. It would be a huge gamble for the prosecution and I'm guessing defense won't want to put them through a cross examination. Reading those texts that prosecution used in exhibits I think I can understand why the daughters are sticking with their father. The revelation that Suzanne had a 2 year affair probably blew their minds, especially the older who experienced less of the arguing as it probably ramped up after she wasn't living in the house since she wanted things to return to like they were. They aren't needed to substantiate the marriage was collapsing I don't think and they add nothing to the charge that Barry murdered Suzanne on May 9 or 10 since they were far far away. You never know, but right now I don't think they will be called.

If the state calls either of them, isn't the defense limited to questioning on the lines of what the state asked? I am curious when this camping trip was planned, who set it up, if there was any discussion about it, and what they knew about Barry being out of town (if they knew he was leaving Sunday early or if they thought he would be home with their mom on Mothers Day when they decided to go away). If they were questioned about those things wouldn't the defense only be allowed to question them on those topics? Maybe I'm off there.
 
  • #887
The solution is to find another inmate and stack his commissary to buy all of the Chili Cheese Fritos before Barry!

I'm a little petty sometimes.

Petty.....no.
Genius.....YES!
 
  • #888
On page 5, I see Affidavit for Tonya Holliday. Do we know who that is and how that relates to this case? I haven't heard that name mentioned before.
I noticed that. There is a person with that name in Anderson, IN and other places so perhaps she called the tip line so was interviewed. It was added just this year in Feb. so no guesses from me how it relates to the charges in Colorado if it relates at all. Prosecution also has due to the courts the justification for Charge 3 and Charge 5 as that has not been addressed yet and defense motioned to delete them, but judge gave prosecution a couple weeks to get those pieces together (Tampering with evidence and attempt to influence). It doesn't seem plausible that a "new" affidavit and new "person" relates to those two charges, but you never know.
 
  • #889
That conversation was about the body cam raw footage. You can get a really good look at the back of Barry's right hand when they are at the closet door. I can't make out any marks there, but the footage is pretty low res.

Thank you. I thought it was all the etc pictures.
 
  • #890
  • #891
Also, I see this
MOTION TO STRIKE PROPOSED WITNESS SHERI VANINO

I haven't heard that name before either.
 
  • #892
Also, I see this
MOTION TO STRIKE PROPOSED WITNESS SHERI VANINO

I haven't heard that name before either.
That relates to profiling/behavior analysis I believe. I think prosecution planned on using some of it and the judge said no.
 
  • #893
  • #894
I noticed that. There is a person with that name in Anderson, IN and other places so perhaps she called the tip line so was interviewed. It was added just this year in Feb. so no guesses from me how it relates to the charges in Colorado if it relates at all. Prosecution also has due to the courts the justification for Charge 3 and Charge 5 as that has not been addressed yet and defense motioned to delete them, but judge gave prosecution a couple weeks to get those pieces together (Tampering with evidence and attempt to influence). It doesn't seem plausible that a "new" affidavit and new "person" relates to those two charges, but you never know.

Interesting.. so the defense wants the prosecution to show evidence that Barry tampered with evidence and attempted to influence?

I feel like the trash dumps and admitting to throwing out the tranquillizer dart material is enough for the first one. Then attempting to influence would be the lies he told, asking for immunity, maybe the conversations he had that felt like he was buddies with LE and somehow in there that is considered attempted to influence? I'll have to read up on that charge to understand better what legally qualifies. I assumed the many lies in all the interviews could count.
 
  • #895
  • #896
Found this regarding "attempting to influence a public servant"

Attempting to Influence a Public Servant 18-8-306 | Denver Crime Lawyer

"The key then is your intent in trying to deceive a police officer in an attempt to alter what that public servant would have ordinarily done if he or she had the true information at hand."

I'd say Barry did this plenty. Starting with claiming their marriage was perfect. I'd say that counts as attempting to influence.
 
  • #897
Found this regarding "attempting to influence a public servant"

Attempting to Influence a Public Servant 18-8-306 | Denver Crime Lawyer

"The key then is your intent in trying to deceive a police officer in an attempt to alter what that public servant would have ordinarily done if he or she had the true information at hand."

I'd say Barry did this plenty. Starting with claiming their marriage was perfect. I'd say that counts as attempting to influence.

Or the staged bike scene?
 
  • #898
One more question.. I notice this on the first page of that filing.

ROLE NAME
IMP 1 SUR MORPHEW, MALLORY
VIC 1 PRA *** Victim ***
VIC 2 PRA *** Victim ***

Anyone know what this means? I thought it was those an automatic protection order were given to, but that doesn't make sense with Mallory being listed.
 
  • #899
MM1 and MM2 were issued orders as legally required by Judge Murphy and the very beginning. The rest were added at different dates if I recall.
 
  • #900
Ha! He was smart enough to change his stance with Holly (page 57).

Barry told Holly that he had an ex-FBI guy working for him and sometimes saying he had a P.I. (private investigator) working for him who charged him over $50,000.56 Once Barry told Holly and Jeff that he may have found where someone was holding Suzanne and asked Jeff to come to Colorado to "cut the guy's balls off."

I assume that Barry told investigators about this location that he amazingly discovered.

JK.
Yeah right. Mister cheapskate BM, who needs to drop his trash in 5 different locations because he doesn’t want to pay to dispose of it (when there’s a dumpster within walking distance of his home no less) is going to pay some ex FBI/PI $50,000 to find Suzanne. :rolleyes: Speaking of dumpsters, I have a hard time believing SM was at the dumpster going for a walk with him when they met up with the woman cleaning the Air BnB’s in the neighbourhood. More and more I think she came across Sho and Bare. Wasn’t Sho the cleaning lady for the couple that own the residence BM is residing in now?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
84
Guests online
2,320
Total visitors
2,404

Forum statistics

Threads
633,153
Messages
18,636,472
Members
243,415
Latest member
n_ibbles
Back
Top