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

[Love Never Fails]

DBM

 

[susiQ]

That there were no chemicals at PP should hardly be exculpatory! He said he'd used it in April so it ought to have been there.

That it was no longer there when you'd expect it to be there is evidentiary!

The defendant disposed of it in order to conceal his method!

The defense would have the judge believe that a sheath was planted (which makes no sense because who could've predicted Barry would cop to owning, using and disposing of tranq materials?!) or that it had nothing to do with MDW (but again, then why was Barry disposing of tranq materials on MDW?) And what exactly was he doing on Saturday, in the minutes following 2:43? He admits he was running around, admits he was firing a weapon....

He himself fills in the blanks...

Question stands:

Why was there a syringe sheath at all?

He wasn't tranqueing chipmunk cheeks.

Unless that was a pet name.

JMO

Maybe Bare can fill in these blanks: d_r_n_ed p_yc_o_a_h
But, then again, maybe not.

 

[Megnut]

RSABBM

THIS^^^is a most ridiculous statement. Come on now! How many times have you found and item in the bottom of your dryer that undoubtedly came from your or a family members pocket?! Goodness knows I wish those pesky Kleenex tissues would stay in! Quarter, dimes, nickels and pennies. I’ve even been fortunate enough to find some bills! I really hate the chapsticks that mess up a load.

Dead give away IE. YOU don’t do your own laundry! JMHO

My thinking as well. What difference would it make if BAM and dart were in an outside shed on the seven acres? It doesn’t matter where the materials were kept. The judge doesn’t know if Suzanne was injected inside or outside. The only reason a sheath was in the dryer was because Barry washed and dried his shorts, and that’s where Barry left the sheath.

Oh, Suzanne, why didn't you ever tell me to check pockets before throwing things in the washer?

Proof Barry wasn't probably well-acquainted with their laundry room.

I wouldn't be surprised if Suzanne started doing his laundry at Purdue. Probably helped him with his homework too -- what with his major league injury -- might've been hard to hold a pencil.

Judging by the interior of Suzanne's home and vehicle in contrast to Barry's pigpen garage and truck, I'd say Suzanne made a career of cleaning up after Barry.

Until the weekend he had to do it himself.

Oh, Suzanne...

JMO

 

[Momofthreeboys]

RSABBM

THIS^^^is a most ridiculous statement. Come on now! How many times have you found and item in the bottom of your dryer that undoubtedly came from your or a family members pocket?! Goodness knows I wish those pesky Kleenex tissues would stay in! Quarter, dimes, nickels and pennies. I’ve even been fortunate enough to find some bills! I really hate the chapsticks that mess up a load.

Dead give away IE. YOU don’t do your own laundry! JMHO

I think one of the most important aspects of this theory is actually the DNA....it will come down to, in my opinion, if prosecution can connect the needle sheath to Barry to the murder in a manner that meets inference as opposed to speculation. I never thought the "vet" was important to their case but I do think someone that can help a jury understand why Barry's DNA isn't on that dryer sheath would be important. I think they also have a hiccup that it wasn't found in the first search but we've heard everything from it was in the drum, to it was in the trap...I don't know where that sheath was. Chances are every single juror has done laundry before. I also don't believe for a heartbeat that Barry hasn't done laundry ever in his life so that tips to the prosecution. Even if you grew up in a household with laundry service, or a housekeeper, or a parent that did your laundry...just about every one lives alone at some point in their life and has to deal with their own dirty clothes, sheets and towels. I also don't buy the theory that people wash their sheets separate from other clothes, I probably wouldn't put dark blue jeans in with light colored sheets but sure I put filthy dirty clothes in with sheets and add a second rinse. Do it all the time for efficiency. So the odds of 12 jurors agreeing that no one washes their sheets with other clothes I don't think will fly. If defense can successfully counter then no inference can be drawn in my opinion and is just one more reason why I think the tranquilizing theory is weak. It could have happened that way absolutely, but I don't think prosecution has the evidential proof and never have.

 

[Curiousobserver]

His whole behavior was off; not just that quote.

This case grabbed my attention right away, as it initially appeared to be a stranger abduction, which is an incredibly rare event on the whole.

Even more unusual, was Suzanne's victimology. She was a low risk victim, doing an activity in a low crime area. She was also outside the typical age range of someone who falls prey to a p REDACTED BY ME.

The other unusual thing was that law enforcement was immediately focused on him in spite of the fact he was known to them via the fire department and they likely shared mutual friends.

Something about the scene, his demeanor etc..

 

[Megnut]

The other unusual thing was that law enforcement was immediately focused on him in spite of the fact he was known to them via the fire department and they likely shared mutual friends.

Something about the scene, his demeanor etc..

"M-m-mount-t-tain liiiiiiiiion."

JMO

 

[susiQ]

"M-m-mount-t-tain liiiiiiiiion."

JMO

 

[Hoss569]

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

With all the talk of Lawsuits that BM may attempt, are there just as many that others can pursue against him? I am no attorney but I think back to OJ Simpson...

Also, in a lawsuit trial, is there less burden of proof needed to file or successfully sue someone than the state proving beyond doubt of a crime?

Just some thoughts I had...

 

[mrjitty]

My thinking as well. What difference would it make if BAM and dart were in an outside shed on the seven acres? It doesn’t matter where the materials were kept. The judge doesn’t know if Suzanne was injected inside or outside. The only reason a sheath was in the dryer was because Barry washed and dried his shorts, and that’s where Barry left the sheath.

BBM

This is why i think the expert witness doesn't matter. These are just basic inferences from fact evidence

 

[Momofthreeboys]

With all the talk of Lawsuits that BM may attempt, are there just as many that others can pursue against him? I am no attorney but I think back to OJ Simpson...

Also, in a lawsuit trial, is there less burden of proof needed to file or successfully sue someone than the state proving beyond doubt of a crime?

Just some thoughts I had...

For wrongful death in Colorado I believe only the daughters have a legal right to sue for wrongful death and the statute of limitations is 2 years. An interesting question since Suzanne is not yet declared legally deceased so I'm not sure how that factors into the 2 year timeline or when the proverbial clock starts ticking. "Of course she'd dead" doesn't equate to "yes she's deceased" in my mind but I'm no legal expert.

 

[mom2chloe]

With all the talk of Lawsuits that BM may attempt, are there just as many that others can pursue against him? I am no attorney but I think back to OJ Simpson...

Also, in a lawsuit trial, is there less burden of proof needed to file or successfully sue someone than the state proving beyond doubt of a crime?

Just some thoughts I had...

I’m especially interested to see how Seattle weighs in on your question. Personally I would love the Moormans to sue the pants off Barry with a wrongful death lawsuit. Fingers crossed!

 

[CGray123]

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

Reasonable attorney fees are awarded to the prevailing plaintiff under the Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity Act as they are under the Civil Rights Acts, state and Federal. And the potential award is an important element in whether an attorney takes a case. So is the attorney's assessment of the likelihood of recovery and the potential size of the plaintiffs' award. Retainer agreements differ among plaintiffs for a variety of reasons, and there is no doubt that plaintiffs who can pay the hourly rate subsidize those who can't.

Law is a high cost business. A friend who is a partner has to bring in a base of $200,000 a month baseline under his partnership agreement. In plaintiffs' work, people who can pay something are expected to do so. Waiting for a potential award of attorney fees at the end of a fully litigated case would not be an attractive option. He would use the potential award to leverage a settlement in a case that would definitely survive the motions to dismiss, but that is the statute's primary value to him. Don't get me wrong, he takes on some cases for indigent clients simply because he believes in the client and is passionate about righting the wrong, but those are high risk business decisions for him and the firm, and the attorney fee statute is a minor factor in the decision.

BM can pay the full freight. His case under the Colorado reform law is inherently speculative: the LEIA has yet to be tested. The likely award is pretty small, $25,000. The investigators didn't violate his rights at all, and not all of them are "peace officers" as defined in the act. The prosecutors, who allegedly violated BM's civil rights by filing a case with no merit and withholding evidence, aren't "peace officers" at all.

Now, all of the state and federal actors could be sued under Federal civil rights law, but that law predates the state reform law you labelled "crazy" by decades. The claims under the Federal statutes would be difficult to sustain IMO, so I have no doubt the attorneys will ask BM to pay what he can. And I have no doubt they will advise him the claims are speculative and the outcome can't be guaranteed.

What I understand from my friend leads me to believe BM will be gambling with high stakes if he pursues a civil claim, even in the unlikely event he is acquitted.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

I’m especially interested to see how Seattle weighs in on your question. Personally I would love the Moormans to sue the pants off Barry with a wrongful death lawsuit. Fingers crossed!

Nice thought, but I believe that is disallowed in Colorado. A lawyer would have to respond. Some of us discussed this back with the Frazee case when her parent sued for wrongful death and the suit was turned down as only the "baby" was technically allowed under Colorado law.

 

[al66pine]

dbm

 

[al66pine]

Safe Deposit Box or Gun Safe at Home?

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

@Puzzles8 Good point. That was a big, Big, BIG safe in the PP garage which could accommodate one or more large articles that few S.D. boxes would hold. No records of access (when it was opened & closed) would seem to be one of BM's desired storage features.

If stashing cash or contraband?
Bank's hardcopy & electronic records show access times & dates but no record of contents. A person can rent multiple smaller boxes, if a large one is not available to contain "The Goods."
Shady actors may want to bypass a S.D. box. A bank's access records could be vital circumstantial evidence re timing to support criminal prosecution, just like phone calls, texts, etc. my2ct.

 

[al66pine]

A Mobil Cubicle Farm???

...
Barry was asked about the tranquilizer darts in his house. He stated that the darts' purpose was to tranquilize bucks to sell them. He said the bucks could then be placed in a trailer that has cubicles....

@MassGuy bbm sbm Thanks for your post. BM's description prompted my imagination to go wild w a
cartoon panel, akin to Gary Larson's The Far Side:

A couple groggy bucks sit at desks in cubicles on BM's flatbed trailer, as one clumsily tries to dial 911 for help and the other slowly texts an SOS plea to the A.S.P.C.A.

 

[Seattle1]

My thinking as well. What difference would it make if BAM and dart were in an outside shed on the seven acres? It doesn’t matter where the materials were kept. The judge doesn’t know if Suzanne was injected inside or outside. The only reason a sheath was in the dryer was because Barry washed and dried his shorts, and that’s where Barry left the sheath.

^^bbm

Of course, the sheat was inside BM's shorts (or the bedsheet)!

In his own words, BM told Agent Grusing he used a tranquilizer dart in April 2020 -- (which very well could have been 10 days before SM's May 9/10 murder), and that he may have disposed of tranquilizer material during his Broomfield trash runs.

This ^^ after first telling investigators during his earliest interviews that he'd not used the dart Rx since Indiana.

BM could have (and should have) kept his mouth shut since the only evidence was a broken dart gun!

These facts are what make me nervous about Judge Lama. It seems to me that he's behind on the AA, and simply accepted IE's version when deciding the defense motion.

MOO

 

[Seattle1]

Reasonable attorney fees are awarded to the prevailing plaintiff under the Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity Act as they are under the Civil Rights Acts, state and Federal. And the potential award is an important element in whether an attorney takes a case. So is the attorney's assessment of the likelihood of recovery and the potential size of the plaintiffs' award. Retainer agreements differ among plaintiffs for a variety of reasons, and there is no doubt that plaintiffs who can pay the hourly rate subsidize those who can't.

Law is a high cost business. A friend who is a partner has to bring in a base of $200,000 a month baseline under his partnership agreement. In plaintiffs' work, people who can pay something are expected to do so. Waiting for a potential award of attorney fees at the end of a fully litigated case would not be an attractive option. He would use the potential award to leverage a settlement in a case that would definitely survive the motions to dismiss, but that is the statute's primary value to him. Don't get me wrong, he takes on some cases for indigent clients simply because he believes in the client and is passionate about righting the wrong, but those are high risk business decisions for him and the firm, and the attorney fee statute is a minor factor in the decision.

BM can pay the full freight. His case under the Colorado reform law is inherently speculative: the LEIA has yet to be tested. The likely award is pretty small, $25,000. The investigators didn't violate his rights at all, and not all of them are "peace officers" as defined in the act. The prosecutors, who allegedly violated BM's civil rights by filing a case with no merit and withholding evidence, aren't "peace officers" at all.

Now, all of the state and federal actors could be sued under Federal civil rights law, but that law predates the state reform law you labelled "crazy" by decades. The claims under the Federal statutes would be difficult to sustain IMO, so I have no doubt the attorneys will ask BM to pay what he can. And I have no doubt they will advise him the claims are speculative and the outcome can't be guaranteed.

What I understand from my friend leads me to believe BM will be gambling with high stakes if he pursues a civil claim, even in the unlikely event he is acquitted.

IMO, state statutes for civil rights claims seemed to be written very loosely-- perhaps because the majority of cases are heard in federal courts. (I don't know for certain but think Colorado may be a state that relies on a civil rights commission to screen civil rights claims).

Thanks again @CGray123 for sharing your insight-- time for me to move on to trying to understand Judge Lama's decision on the defense motions!

Relative to BM's civil rights claim in question, OP may have missed this:

Specific to BM's civil rights claim by Fisher & Byrialsen, PLLC, while we're not privileged to his agreement, their website provides the following:

Fees
Fisher & Byrialsen, PLLC handles all civil rights cases on a contingency fee basis. This means that the firm does not get paid unless the case is successfully litigated or settled.

Law Offices of Fisher and Byrialsen

 

[Seattle1]

With all the talk of Lawsuits that BM may attempt, are there just as many that others can pursue against him? I am no attorney but I think back to OJ Simpson...

Also, in a lawsuit trial, is there less burden of proof needed to file or successfully sue someone than the state proving beyond doubt of a crime?

Just some thoughts I had...

For wrongful death in Colorado I believe only the daughters have a legal right to sue for wrongful death and the statute of limitations is 2 years. An interesting question since Suzanne is not yet declared legally deceased so I'm not sure how that factors into the 2 year timeline or when the proverbial clock starts ticking. "Of course she'd dead" doesn't equate to "yes she's deceased" in my mind but I'm no legal expert.

I’m especially interested to see how Seattle weighs in on your question. Personally I would love the Moormans to sue the pants off Barry with a wrongful death lawsuit. Fingers crossed!

We discussed the merits of a wrongful death suit earlier here and @Momofthreeboys is correct. Under Colorado Law, SM's family (i.e., family defined as SM's parent or parents) does not have standing because SM had a spouse and children. And even if she did not have children, unfortunately, siblings of the deceased do not have standing in Colorado.

IMO, from what we know about the relationship today, it would make no sense for the daughters to sue BM since it would be like suing themselves.

Wrongful Death Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ).

One of the first questions that must be addressed in any wrongful death case is: who are the people who are legally entitled to bring an action to recover damages. Another way of phrasing this question is: who has “standing to sue.” In Colorado, C.R.S. § 13-21-201 governs who may bring a wrongful death action.

During the first year after death, this statute gives priority to the spouse of the decedent to commence a wrongful death action. If there is no spouse, a wrongful death action may be brought by the heirs of the decedent, and, if there are no spouse and no heirs, by the decedent’s parent or parents. In the second year after death, a wrongful death action may be commenced by the spouse or heirs of the decedent.

Under Colorado law, the term “heirs” has been narrowly construed by the courts. For purposes of the Wrongful Death Act, the term “heirs” includes only lineal descendants of the decedent, and does not include siblings or parents. Parents have standing to bring an action for the wrongful death of a child only if the child is not survived by a spouse or heirs. This is true even if the spouse elects not to pursue a wrongful death claim. Under Colorado law, if the decedent is not survived by a spouse, heirs or parents, siblings still have no standing to maintain a wrongful death action, even if such siblings are the decedent’s only surviving relatives.

Pursuant to a recent statutory amendment, a “designated beneficiary” of the decedent may also have standing to bring a wrongful death action, in lieu of, or in addition to other parties with standing enumerated by the statute.

 

[justtrish]

View attachment 339146

From pg 121/131 of the AA -- Agent Grusing told BM that they did not find any BAM (i.e., a brand name for a deer tranquilizer inside the house). Barry expanded here about BAM, Telazol, and Xylazine, and offered he last used rx tranquilizer in April 2020 (SM vanished May 10, 2020).

BAM Deer Tranquilizer

ETA: Defense Exhibits -- see pgs 51-69 for dart evidence.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/11th_Judicial_District/Chaffee/cases of interest/21CR78/Defense Prelim Hearing Ex Rest.pdf

I remember reading this. I also think Barry is full of you know what. He could have had plenty of other drugs or chemicals he used and not just the BAM. He threw it out so we have no idea what he might have had in the tranquillizer gun. He had many things we may not know about and he threw a lot of things away. He had a camera we wouldn't have known about if the officer didn't find that manual and then not find a camera that went with it. I was just trying to point out the veterinarian said the BAM would work in a person and it seemed there was a longer time frame mentioned for her being incapacitated from that drug. I think it's possible he had something else he could have used and she wouldn't have had 10+ minutes to run for her life, it may have been much quicker.