Still Missing CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *arrest* #99

[Momofthreeboys]

We all have wondered if Suzanne had a safe deposit box.
Did Barry?

In an era of digital and inexpensive fire boxes and fire safes are safety deposit boxes still a thing? My 90 year old parents have one, but I don't even think my bank has them anymore.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

In an era of digital and inexpensive fire boxes and fire safes are safety deposit boxes still a thing? My 90 year old parents have one, but I don't even think my bank has them anymore.

My small regional bank still has them.

I keep reading about fire "resistant" boxes burning up in fires, so I'm glad banks still have them.

MOO

 

[Trebor5591]

I think it does make some sense.

If he shot her with a dart, in the back, while she was running away, it would not be that easy for her to take the needle out. And even if it took 10 or 15 for her to totally knock her out---so what? She wasn't going to get away at that point. She may have run up to her room to try and escape but he just had to break in and WAIT for her to pass out.

IMO, if he shot her with a dart that took 5 to 10 minutes to work, that is 5 to 10 minutes she would have to run away and call for help. "Help me 9-1-1, by husband just shot me with a dart gun". That's why the tranquiller dart theory makes no sense, and why the prosecution should stay away from it. Why would a strong man need to rely on a tranquilizer dart? If he had decided to kill her, what he would need to do (sorry for being graphic) is get behind her and choke her out. She might be able to scratch his arm some, which I believe she did, but that's about all. There is absolutely no need to dart her. The more I hear about this tranquilizer dart theory, the more I feel the police/prosecution don't know what they are doing. If they win a conviction, and I hope they do, it will likely be because of Barry and his big mouth on record saying so many conflicting things, and not any smart police work by LEO. MOO

 

[pseudo_hum]

If he shot her with a dart that took 5 to 10 minutes to work, that is 5 to 10 minutes she would have to run away and call for help. "Help me 9-1-1, by husband just shot me with a dart gun". That's why the tranquiller dart theory makes no sense, and why the prosecution should stay away from it. Why would a strong man need to rely on a tranquilizer dart? If he had decided to kill her, what he would need to do (sorry for being graphic) is get behind her and choke her out. She might be able to scratch his arm some, which I believe she did, but that's about all. There is absolutely no need to dart her. The more I hear about this tranquilizer dart theory, the more I feel the police/prosecution don't know what they are doing. If they win a conviction, and I hope they do, it will likely be because of Barry and his big mouth on record saying so many conflicting things, and not any smart police work by LEO.

But we do not know if she had a communication device at her disposal. Maybe she was showering or away from her phone/tablet. We really do not know, so I believe, IMO, the dart theory is still in "play".

 

[susiQ]

IMO, if he shot her with a dart that took 5 to 10 minutes to work, that is 5 to 10 minutes she would have to run away and call for help. "Help me 9-1-1, by husband just shot me with a dart gun". That's why the tranquiller dart theory makes no sense, and why the prosecution should stay away from it. Why would a strong man need to rely on a tranquilizer dart? If he had decided to kill her, what he would need to do (sorry for being graphic) is get behind her and choke her out. She might be able to scratch his arm some, which I believe she did, but that's about all. There is absolutely no need to dart her. The more I hear about this tranquilizer dart theory, the more I feel the police/prosecution don't know what they are doing. If they win a conviction, and I hope they do, it will likely be because of Barry and his big mouth on record saying so many conflicting things, and not any smart police work by LEO. MOO

I think we’ve explained this before. If he killed her then and there, it’s possible the body would evacuate which may leave traceable evidence. He could have approached her in an unthreatening manner and then just “stuck” her with the dart and sent her running without her phone to call 911. Even if she had her phone, have you ever tried running for your life and getting out a phone call?

There are certainly a number of ways this could have played out and I for one wouldn’t rule out the dart and tranquilizer. JMO

 

[CGray123]

This is a civil rights suit where liability is judged by a lesser standard. It will also be a litmus test for a new law. The reform is crazy -- nothing will surprise here. MOO

ETA: IMO, if BM is found guilty, his civil complaint most likely goes away. If BM is acquitted, and especially if his case is dismissed, he will probably prevail on his civil claims.

BM will have spent better than $500k on his defense, and unlike criminal complaints that punish offenders, civil suits are meant to monetarily compensate people for damage to their reputations and recovery of their legal expenses.

The reform isn't well understood. It waives immunity for Colorado peace officers who violate a defendant's civil rights and caps damages at $25,000. But then, it allows the officers' employers to indemnify them. Here's the full text:

Colo. Rev. Stat. Section 13-21-131 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

(1) A peace officer, as defined in section 24-31-901(3), who, under color of law, subjects or causes to be subjected, including failing to intervene, any other person to the deprivation of any individual rights that create binding obligations on government actors secured by the bill of rights, article II of the state constitution, is liable to the injured party for legal or equitable relief or any other appropriate relief.

(2)(a) Statutory immunities and statutory limitations on liability, damages, or attorney fees do not apply to claims brought pursuant to this section. The "Colorado Governmental Immunity Act", article 10 of title 24, does not apply to claims brought pursuant to this section.

(b) Qualified immunity is not a defense to liability pursuant to this section.

(3) In any action brought pursuant to this section, a court shall award reasonable attorney fees and costs to a prevailing plaintiff. In actions for injunctive relief, a court shall deem a plaintiff to have prevailed if the plaintiff's suit was a substantial factor or significant catalyst in obtaining the results sought by the litigation. When a judgment is entered in favor of a defendant, the court may award reasonable costs and attorney fees to the defendant for defending any claims the court finds frivolous.

(4)(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a peace officer's employer shall indemnify its peace officers for any liability incurred by the peace officer and for any judgment or settlement entered against the peace officer for claims arising pursuant to this section; except that, if the peace officer's employer determines on a case-by-case basis that the officer did not act upon a good faith and reasonable belief that the action was lawful, then the peace officer is personally liable and shall not be indemnified by the peace officer's employer for five percent of the judgment or settlement or twenty-five thousand dollars, whichever is less. Notwithstanding any provision of this section to the contrary, if the peace officer's portion of the judgment is uncollectible from the peace officer, the peace officer's employer or insurance shall satisfy the full amount of the judgment or settlement. A public entity does not have to indemnify a peace officer if the peace officer was convicted of a criminal violation for the conduct from which the claim arises unless the peace officer's employer was a causal factor in the violation, through its action or inaction.

(b)(I) An employer shall not:
(A) Preemptively determine whether a peace officer acted in good faith before such action in question has occurred; or
(B) Provide a determination providing that any peace officer or peace officers are deemed to have acted in good faith until completion of a documented investigation conducted by the employer.

(II) If a person believes that an employer has violated the provisions of subsection (4)(b)(I) of this section, the person shall submit a complaint to the P.O.S.T. board, created in section 24-31-302, which shall refer the complaint to an administrative law judge to determine whether a violation occurred. The administrative law judge shall notify the P.O.S.T. board chair of a finding that a violation of subsection (4)(b)(I) of this section occurred. If a violation is found, the P.O.S.T. board shall not provide P.O.S.T. cash fund money to the employer for one full year from the date of the finding.

(III) For the purposes of this subsection (4)(b), an employer includes the elected sheriff, chief of police, city or town administrator, county administrator, mayor, city or town council, county commission, or any other public body with formal supervision and oversight of a law enforcement agency.

(5) A civil action pursuant to this section must be commenced within two years after the cause of action accrues.

 

[CGray123]

I'm not disagreeing with you but I'll put it this way: if BM is found guilty, then the civil suit alleging unlawful arrest, malicious prosecution, and defamation, probably goes away.

However, if BM is acquitted, and especially if his case is dismissed, he will probably prevail on his civil claims.

BM will have spent better than $500k on his defense, and unlike criminal complaints that punish offenders, civil suits are meant to monetarily compensate people for damage to their reputations and recovery of their legal expenses.

MOO

RBBM. I respectfully disagree with the bolded statement. I believe the CCSO and 11th JD are insured against law enforcement civil rights claims by the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Association (CIRSA), and that CBI officials are insured by the state risk management agency. Both will see any lawsuit by BM as a test case, and in my view will not settle the dubious claims of civil rights violations without vigorously contesting them. Most of the 26 individuals named in BM's notice (including FBI agents) don't meet the definition of "peace officer" under the waiver and will be dismissed early in the case. The rest of the claims will be dismissed as deficient, as a matter of law.

In the unlikely event that he is acquitted, BM would spend another $500,000 pursuing this doubtful case, throwing good money after bad.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

But we do not know if she had a communication device at her disposal. Maybe she was showering or away from her phone/tablet. We really do not know, so I believe, IMO, the dart theory is still in "play".

I think it will be interesting to see what latitude prosecution and defense is given....Objections could be critical to this trial...if a questioner strays into expressing conclusions rather than stating facts, or if the witness is not qualified to answer the question, and so on. I've opined that the motions hearings will shape who actually testifies and I'll also guess that the objections will shape the actual trial. I'm sort of on record as not a fan of the dart theory, and I'm curious how prosecution will be able to tie a needle sheath in a dryer that was missed the first time into to their theory of the alleged murder without objections that may or may not be upheld. We're getting very close in weeks to finding out.

 

[Seattle1]

In the unlikely event that he is acquitted, BM would spend another $500,000 pursuing this doubtful case, throwing good money after bad.

^^rsbm

Not likely!

Unlike BM's criminal case, I'd think it a first for any plaintiff, including BM, to fund a CIVIL lawsuit out of pocket.

IMO, one thing BM hasn't failed at is finding the best of the best in legal practice-- including Fisher & Byrialsen, P.L.L.C, a Denver and New York law firm that filed a notice of claim on his behalf.

https://www.fox21news.com/top-stori...e-da-investigators-for-malicious-prosecution/

 

[CGray123]

^^rsbm

Not likely!

Unlike BM's criminal case, I'd think it a first for any plaintiff, including BM, to fund a CIVIL lawsuit out of pocket.

IMO, one thing BM hasn't failed at is finding the best of the best in legal practice-- including Fisher & Byrialsen, P.L.L.C, a Denver and New York law firm that filed a notice of claim on his behalf.

https://www.fox21news.com/top-stori...e-da-investigators-for-malicious-prosecution/

Not so, according to my plaintiff's civil rights attorney friends. Civil rights is not handled like a slip and fall liability case, in which the attorney who takes the case may take a percentage of the award or settlement. For those who can pay, the best in the civil rights business cost, up front, $50,000 just to do their due diligence and file a complaint. They may bill at a negotiated rate that may reflect the contingency fee concept, but when the client's obligation exceeds the initial retainer their agreements require more. In a fully contested case involving 26 individuals with their own representation, with lots of experts providing input at BM's expense, I'm confident he'll be spending a huge amount on a case that will be dismissed without a trial, then appealed.

 

[Trebor5591]

Not so, according to my plaintiff's civil rights attorney friends. Civil rights is not handled like a slip and fall liability case, in which the attorney who takes the case may take a percentage of the award or settlement. For those who can pay, the best in the civil rights business cost, up front, $50,000 just to do their due diligence and file a complaint. They may bill at a negotiated rate that may reflect the contingency fee concept, but when the client's obligation exceeds the initial retainer their agreements require more. In a fully contested case involving 26 individuals with their own representation, with lots of experts providing input at BM's expense, I'm confident he'll be spending a huge amount on a case that will be dismissed without a trial, then appealed.

How much money does he have? Is he rich enough to take on significant legal expenses and not use up all his cash and his children's future inheritance? Doesn't seem like a winning move on his part.

 

[girlhasnoname]

IMO, if he shot her with a dart that took 5 to 10 minutes to work, that is 5 to 10 minutes she would have to run away and call for help. "Help me 9-1-1, by husband just shot me with a dart gun". That's why the tranquiller dart theory makes no sense, and why the prosecution should stay away from it. Why would a strong man need to rely on a tranquilizer dart? If he had decided to kill her, what he would need to do (sorry for being graphic) is get behind her and choke her out. She might be able to scratch his arm some, which I believe she did, but that's about all. There is absolutely no need to dart her. The more I hear about this tranquilizer dart theory, the more I feel the police/prosecution don't know what they are doing. If they win a conviction, and I hope they do, it will likely be because of Barry and his big mouth on record saying so many conflicting things, and not any smart police work by LEO. MOO

We don't know the totality of the State's evidence yet. There's a reason they advanced the tranq'd theory at the PH, I feel confident they have more to confirm this suspicion.

And isn't it just a great coincidence ole' BARE was caught in a lie (first denied anything about tranq and then when shown evidence he admitted to it) and then confessed to disposing of the tranq in one of the famous 5 trash can dumps??

Yeah, no. BARE is a lying liar who lies and he is going down IMO.

 

[Puzzles8]

We all have wondered if Suzanne had a safe deposit box.
Did Barry?

Barry had a large gun safe in his garage. This safe was completely under his cloak and control.

With safety deposit box, there are records. IMO, Barry doesn't like official records......

My bet is he had no safety deposit box.

JMO

 

[Seattle1]

Not so, according to my plaintiff's civil rights attorney friends. Civil rights is not handled like a slip and fall liability case, in which the attorney who takes the case may take a percentage of the award or settlement. For those who can pay, the best in the civil rights business cost, up front, $50,000 just to do their due diligence and file a complaint. They may bill at a negotiated rate that may reflect the contingency fee concept, but when the client's obligation exceeds the initial retainer their agreements require more. In a fully contested case involving 26 individuals with their own representation, with lots of experts providing input at BM's expense, I'm confident he'll be spending a huge amount on a case that will be dismissed without a trial, then appealed.

Thanks for sharing your insight @CGray123.

I think the experience of your civil rights attorney friends to require and obtain huge advanced fees from their plaintiff clients is very unique -- unless of course, they only take cases with gross uncertainty by very well-heeled clients.

Given how the majority of civil rights complaints are tried in Federal Courts where 42 USC
§ 1988 allows federal courts to award reasonable attorney’s fees for actions pursued under section 1983 (civil rights violations), in my experience, most plaintiffs in civil rights matters do not pay hefty legal fees upfront.

I believe the same statute has long motivated a defendant (police department, some other agency, or municipality) to settle prior to trial (not risking both compensatory money damages but also attorneys fees-- easily doubling the amount a defendant required to payout).

Specific to the unprecedented (and untried) Colorado reform law, I'm really not familiar with exactly what parts of the proposal made it into law but I do recall that similar to federal statute, the proposal would have allowed anyone whose Colorado constitutional rights are infringed upon to bring a civil action in state court and receive reasonable attorney fees and court costs upon prevailing.

And to quote reform supporter Attorney Andy McNulty:

“Without the Colorado Rights Act, the Colorado Constitution is nothing more than a piece of paper on a shelf gathering dust for most Colorado residents,” said Andy McNulty, a Denver civil rights attorney. Most Coloradans, he testified, can’t afford to pay an attorney to fight violations of their state constitutional rights.

IMO, the same applies to most individuals in Colorado and beyond (well, except for the clients of your civil rights attorney friends).

MOO

42 U.S. Code § 1988 - Proceedings in vindication of civil rights
https://www.kln-law.com/andrew-mcnulty

 

[DeDee]

RBBM. I respectfully disagree with the bolded statement. I believe the CCSO and 11th JD are insured against law enforcement civil rights claims by the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Association (CIRSA), and that CBI officials are insured by the state risk management agency. Both will see any lawsuit by BM as a test case, and in my view will not settle the dubious claims of civil rights violations without vigorously contesting them. Most of the 26 individuals named in BM's notice (including FBI agents) don't meet the definition of "peace officer" under the waiver and will be dismissed early in the case. The rest of the claims will be dismissed as deficient, as a matter of law.

In the unlikely event that he is acquitted, BM would spend another $500,000 pursuing this doubtful case, throwing good money after bad.

Those Men in Black sitting with the DT are not attending for free, are they? However, many civil attorneys will take a civil case based on its merits - free of charge. Yes or No? However, if the plaintiff were to win, which BM won't, then they take a megabite of the pie. Probably as much as 40% of the settlement is deposited into their bank accts before BM receives a dime.

I do not feel threatened by BM filing civil actions against the Investigating Team members (or an appeal after conviction). A competent and trusted Judge signed a Probable Cause Warrant. We've read the AA and have seen the images of texts, trash dumps and deep scratch wounds. There is no way a Judge or Jury would side with BM. It was a fair investigation with most of it written in reports or audio/video recorded. The Prosecutors did not set out to get the husband. BM's mountain lion story skewed with the known facts. When coupled with the trucks telematic, the cellular tracings, it is his prevarications that may be his undoing.

Another topic:
My bank certainly has safe deposit boxes. However, any cash tucked inside a SD drawer is not federally insured so if by chance, it all went up in smoke, there's no recourse.

 

[DeDee]

He lied so much. I wonder if he was really cheap? Did he lie about that too?

I just realize what a freak he is to bury furniture. Usually you give it away or set it by the roadside. That had nothing to do with being cheap. He is just…I don’t even have the word!

My mother's favorite word for BM would be scoundrel. As a 4yo, I thought she may be talking about squirrels.

Scoundrel - dirty thoughts, words and deeds, hands and nails, too
Good-for-nothing - another of mom's favorites - works harder, not smarter; cheapskate ATM
Fraudster - voted for an incapacitated and dead Suzanne - this crime never made good sense to me

Atypical - killed then skinned childhood pet; a BM teenager made cash selling pelts from mammals
Depraved - hunted wife as if she's prey with tanq dart as to more easily hide her body before decomp
Immoral - misrepresented value of IN business; called hired subcontractors methheads; accused murderer of Mother with two children

Unscrupulous - used mutual martial funds for silver speculation; prepared a place for Suzanne
Unwonted - thinks we'll believe there was a bike ride or any movement from Suzanne after 2:43pm Sat.
Wicked - premeditated wife's murder; hence, murder1 charge; knowingly lied to multiple FED Agents
Potential Philanderer - named witnesses, possibly unknown to us; AM and cute, young girls' searches

Cheap Cad - buries IN household furniture then loads his truck with antlers and hauls it to Colorado in order to isolate Suzanne; writes 3 words on a receipt found in the trash, to help find his missing wife, after hours, at the market but doesn't mention her age, height or eye color; meets woman, that potentially goes to the same gym, at the neighborhood dumpster; tosses possible evidence as trash and debris into McDonald's trash bin as well as tranquilizer materials placed into area dumpsters that are located 3 hours away from the PP home on Mother's Day

Respectfully submitted, IMOVHO
. the PP

 

[Love Never Fails]

My mother's favorite word for BM would be scoundrel. As a 4yo, I thought she may be talking about squirrels.

Scoundrel - dirty thoughts, words and deeds, hands and nails, too
Good-for-nothing - another of mom's favorites - works harder, not smarter; cheapskate ATM
Fraudster - voted for an incapacitated and dead Suzanne - this crime never made good sense to me

Atypical - killed then skinned childhood pet; a BM teenager made cash selling pelts from mammals
Depraved - hunted wife as if she's prey with tanq dart as to more easily hide her body before decomp
Immoral - misrepresented value of IN business; called hired subcontractors methheads; accused murderer of Mother with two children

Unscrupulous - used mutual martial funds for silver speculation; prepared a place for Suzanne
Unwonted - thinks we'll believe there was a bike ride or any movement from Suzanne after 2:43pm Sat.
Wicked - premeditated wife's murder; hence, murder1 charge; knowingly lied to multiple FED Agents
Potential Philanderer - named witnesses, possibly unknown to us; AM and cute, young girls' searches

Cheap Cad - buries IN household furniture then loads his truck with antlers and hauls it to Colorado in order to isolate Suzanne; writes 3 words on a receipt found in the trash, to help find his missing wife, after hours, at the market but doesn't mention her age, height or eye color; meets woman, that potentially goes to the same gym, at the neighborhood dumpster; tosses possible evidence as trash and debris into McDonald's trash bin as well as tranquilizer materials placed into area dumpsters that are located 3 hours away from the PP home on Mother's Day

Respectfully submitted, IMOVHO
. the PP

Scoundrel. Good for nothing. I like it. my favorite now is depraved. He is that.

 

[katydid23]

IMO, if he shot her with a dart that took 5 to 10 minutes to work, that is 5 to 10 minutes she would have to run away and call for help. "Help me 9-1-1, by husband just shot me with a dart gun". That's why the tranquiller dart theory makes no sense, and why the prosecution should stay away from it. Why would a strong man need to rely on a tranquilizer dart? If he had decided to kill her, what he would need to do (sorry for being graphic) is get behind her and choke her out. She might be able to scratch his arm some, which I believe she did, but that's about all. There is absolutely no need to dart her. The more I hear about this tranquilizer dart theory, the more I feel the police/prosecution don't know what they are doing. If they win a conviction, and I hope they do, it will likely be because of Barry and his big mouth on record saying so many conflicting things, and not any smart police work by LEO. MOO

But the benefit of the dart theory is it avoids him having a dead body at his home and in his vehicle. One of the main way killers get caught is by forensics teams finding evidence of a dead body and a crime scene, and/or cadaver dogs hitting on the vehicle or the bedroom.

If he chokes her out, now he has a dead body and it is much more dangerous for him to deal with those circumstances than just a 'sleeping' spouse that he has to transport.

 

[Pyrite]

In the unlikely event that he is acquitted, BM would spend another $500,000 pursuing this doubtful case, throwing good money after bad.

RSBM wouldn’t there be litigators who would take this on contingency or just to get into the books for precedent setting law suit?

edit. Never mind. Looking at later posts, Seems like a point of disagreement for now whether or not it will cost BM money to bring the civil laws suit.

 

[Seattle1]

RSBM

I am assuming that info will be admissible, in terms of public domain info, about evidence recovered on site?




As usual, it would be great to have the actual ruling and reasoning but I kind of understand the decision, if, as seems to me, the Judge is saying the witness cannot speculate on the use of such a dart on a human.

But I don't think the prosecution case needs this?

Surely the prosecution case is that he has murdered her and disposed of the body (only reasonable inference), and he did that precisely so we wouldn't know what happened.

But he did leave clues - and those clues help prove his guilt. i.e the dart cap, disposing of the tranq stuff, running around with a gun at the critical moment, allowing for a used cap to be found in the house ....

At least that is how I would argue it.

All that said, I don't see why the expert can't testify about human use, as surely the potential impacts are obvious and basic science?

My understanding was that Judge Lama denied the Vet as an expert witness because there was no tranquilizer Rx located inside the house, and without this, he found the theory that BM used a tranquillzer to incapacitate SM too speculative.

So does that mean that the ingredients in BAM (deer dart sedative) also can't be introduced?

I'm beginning to think the only reason that Judge Lama allowed the Rx needle sheath was because he views it as the equivalent of a BIC pen cap found inside the dryer (which it might as well be without the data explaining the Rx contents)!

I'm desperate to read Judge Lama's actual words in his Orders granting these defense motions.