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

[Skigh]

When did Suzanne go dark?

Right after BM got home.

When was Suzanne's last proof of life?

Right before BM got home.

That, imo, is a huge obstacle to overcome. We are not hearing some bombshell revelations from the defense that create any doubt about who disappeared Suzanne. If they had any sort of hard evidence that shows BM is blameless, we'd know from their plural motions to dismiss.

They also have all Barry's lies to overcome. Innocent people have no need to lie .

 

[Tumbleweed]

Some of ya'll might be interested to learn who owns property up on Garfield.

Quite the teaser! Please do tell...

 

[Momofthreeboys]

When did Suzanne go dark?

Right after BM got home.

When was Suzanne's last proof of life?

Right before BM got home.

That, imo, is a huge obstacle to overcome. We are not hearing some bombshell revelations from the defense that create any doubt about who disappeared Suzanne. If they had any sort of hard evidence that shows BM is blameless, we'd know from their plural motions to dismiss.

I think the time she went missing has never changed from late Saturday afternoon until the time the first people were at the house looking for her - so a roughly 23 hour period of time. I've not heard anything that changes that window factually yet and that is what the prosecution is presenting. The prosecution is presenting a shorter time period ending when Barry left for Broomfield so a 12-13 time period and saying that Barry murdered her at some point during that time period. I agree, if there was proof that Suzanne was alive after 5 AM then this case would never have survived preliminary but defense doesn't have to prove Barry is innocent exactly, they just need to create reasonable doubt about the prosecution's conclusions. If they were to decide to point the finger at someone else specifically, they are required by law to disclose prior to trial. Part two in the link below are the obligations of defense to the prosecution. Rule 16 - Discovery and Procedure Before Trial, Colo. R. Crim. P. 16 | Casetext Search + Citator

 

[justtrish]

They also have all Barry's lies to overcome. Innocent people have no need to lie .

Yes, and this matters. I get that some people are just liars and always have big stories to tell, but even those people should have a part of them that says oh now is the time to be honest. Like maybe any one of the 20+ times he talked to LE.

I also think if there is even a .05% chance that he is innocent, his actions are why he is where he is. I firmly believe he did this. If he did not, all this lying is still why he is here. So this isn't the police railroading him. He lied and lied again and again and again. 20 something times he talked to LE and in every single interview he lied.

 

[Niner]

How about I put a couple of K9's in the zoo?

and don't forget the ducks... duck tape...

We could have them guarding Bare’s enclosure . Make sure they have BIG teeth !

A couple of these guys?

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

You just have to wonder, what the heck are they all so flipping happy about?

You have to think that his attorneys have prompted them to appear this way in public.

 

[pseudo_hum]

You have to think that his attorneys have prompted them to appear this way in public.

Agreed. IMO. oh yes, they want to control EVERYTHING.

 

[Skigh]

You have to think that his attorneys have prompted them to appear this way in public.

I just have to wonder who they think would find them all grinning like Cheshire cats an acceptable look when entering court.

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

Agreed. IMO. oh yes, they want to control EVERYTHING.

The plastered smiles do look pretty odd though. No one would naturally look this way, considering the circumstances.

 

[Skigh]

The plastered smiles do look pretty odd though. No one would naturally look this way, considering the circumstances.

It is also the way the girls are holding onto him .It looks as if they are preventing him from running off!!

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

It is also the way the girls are holding onto him .It looks as if they are preventing him from running off!!

I noticed that when Elizabeth Holmes walked into court for the Theranos daily trial, she did a similar looking parade. Big, fake, plastered smile, holding hands with mom and husband. This must be the legal advice du jour.

 

[Diddian]

You have to think that his attorneys have prompted them to appear this way in public.

Which just goes to show that they aren't nearly as brilliant as they are often given credit for.

"Mom's dead" and "beaming with happiness" do not compute except in the sickest of families.

 

[waldojabba]

rsbm. This is confusing because tweets posted from other reporters at the hearing say the K9 picked up and followed a scent (possibly Suzanne's) along the creek.

So hard to really know isn't it ? The way I view it is the person on the stand said the k-9 picked up no scent and then Iris or a defense person said well isn't it possible they picked up a scent? The person on the stand answered "anything is possible" so Iris morphed that into "so then it is possible it was Suzanne Morphew's scent?" etc - but that's just how I imagine the interaction - We have no actual way of knowing it seems

 

[waldojabba]

Somehow this thing has been derailed. Time to dismiss, get their act together and try again, rather than let him be acquitted. Can’t decide who is most at fault. I want to blame this defense loving judge but maybe the prosecution set it up for failure. Why???

Agree but that’s as good as it gets in setting it up for failure. Did she care about Suzanne or her ego?

I think the new DA just didn't know, what she didn't know. In other words, she had no idea of the magnitude of the position or how to go about it - she just did not know the enormity of the position. And in her defense, without this big murder case or another like it she probably would have been fine. She had no time to get up to speed and sorely miscalculated IMO

 

[O.Incandenza]

If I was the defense I think I would want to be sure this report was in evidence. As it at least shows the possibility that SM was there.

Why would the defense try and keep the handler out as an expert? Is it because an expert can give an opinion (I don’t think SM was there based on my dogs actions) but a regular witness can only state facts (my dog was following a scent from the bike. I used SM’s shorts to give the dog the scent I wanted my dog to find. The dog followed the scent to the river.)

Yes, the handler can still testify about what he saw the dog do. But he can't be asked to interpret what that means as an expert. So the defense will be able to ask him whether his dog followed a scent to the river. But the prosecution will not be able to ask him his expert opinion on whether that was actually a real scent or not.

Similarly, the LE officers who were excluded as experts will be able to testify regarding their conversations with Barry and the steps they took in their investigation, but they won't be able to offer opinions based on their experience ("In my professional experience, suspects who do this sort of thing are frequently lying" etc).

I doubt the veterinarian will be able to testify at all. Without any firsthand involvement with the case, it seems like the only relevant testimony they would be able to offer would be a professional opinion on the effect of the tranquilizer darts.

 

[waldojabba]

I think LE and the DA just fell in love with their theory and didn't have the foresight to think ahead to the flaws in the case. I still stand by my early belief they pulled the arrest too early and should have heeded the experienced CBI recommendation to delay the arrest and pulled the case together first. I was shocked to learn CBI team members had that opinion as I thought I was out standing in a field all by myself with my opinion. I equated it to a chess match many months ago...if the DA wasn't thinking ahead to what moves defense might make and be preemptive you can lose the chess match in my opinion. I get dissed and dismissed for thinking about the defense side of the case, but as a prosecutor if you don't, you end up with a mess of a case like this. The jury is most likely not going to be comprised of people that go in thinking "Barry is guilty and I don't care what anybody else says." It's salvageable as a prosecution but wow the risk of prosecution losing is a big one. Two judges cautioned the prosecution about their case....feels like they weren't listening.

BBM I don't see you being dissed at all on this forum for thinking about the defense side of the case. IMO What I do see in your posts is a tendency to minimize DV, to make excuses for BM's behavior in a vacuum and to not really be comfortable looking at or acknowleding the totality of the prosecution's evidence. When you seem to allude to this forum as being an echo chamber for the prosecution that is dissing the forum IMO. I sense your interest lies more in the legal process of the case, versus who is actually guilty or innocent of committing the murder of Suzanne Morphew. IMO most are looking at the bigger picture. I find no joy in the possibly of seeing a killer go free because the DA is floundering. JMO

 

[susiQ]

and don't forget the ducks... duck tape...



A couple of these guys?
View attachment 338506

What big teeth they have!!! And so white! They’ll do nicely!

 

[O.Incandenza]

“Stealth Experts.” Court filing from March 23rd.
https://www.fox21news.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2022/03/MORPHEW-d62d-mar23.pdf

This is interesting, thanks.

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned before but it looks like the defense team now also includes Hollis Whitson and Jane Fisher-Byrialsen. Fisher-Byrialsen had come up before since she was representing Barry in the threatened civil suit, but Hollis Whitson is new to me. Pretty impressive credentials.

Regarding the motion, I really, really hope that the prosecution has their ducks in a row when it comes to the expert testimony on the telematics and the cell phone data. That's the heart of the case IMO, and it will need credible expert testimony to nail down. The fact that they seem to be trying to sneak in some of those witnesses on the lay witness list is concerning. Why not just qualify the experts normally? But it's hard to know how concerning it is without seeing the full list of experts they have managed to qualify. Hopefully they already have those subjects covered.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

BBM I don't see you being dissed at all on this forum for thinking about the defense side of the case. IMO What I do see in your posts is a tendency to minimize DV, to make excuses for BM's behavior in a vacuum and to not really be comfortable looking at or acknowleding the totality of the prosecution's evidence. When you seem to allude to this forum as being an echo chamber for the prosecution that is dissing the forum IMO. I sense your interest lies more in the legal process of the case, versus who is actually guilty or innocent of committing the murder of Suzanne Morphew. IMO most are looking at the bigger picture. I find no joy in the possibly of seeing a killer go free because the DA is floundering. JMO

Yes my interest is in the trial absolutely. It is each of our state's job to put the right people behind bars if they break the law. I'm not sure what "the bigger picture" is other than that in our country actually. That is the responsibility of the prosecution and yes I've not been happy with the prosecution since the AA was released. And no, I personally cannot get behind the DV accusations and sentence enhancer in this case given what very little we know about the dynamics of Barry or Suzanne's personal life with the fragmented information available. Prosecution can easily suggest motive of the divorce with quite abit of factual information. I'm not totally behind the running around with a tranquilizer gun theory either. I do think he had motive, means and opportunity so the ball is in the prosecution court to prove that with the facts of the case to the satisfaction of an empaneled jury.

 

[JosieMae]

You just have to wonder, what the heck are they all so flipping happy about?

It's all about appearances and always has been. No matter how tone-deaf.