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

[abams]

Defense Atty will rip this apart- sheath could have been in a piece of clothing for years before it came out in the dryer, likewise the sheath could have been in the dryer for years before LE discovered it. It could be from/for something else for someone else that BM wasn't aware of- daughters, wife etc.. They can't link it to the drug and they can't link it to the time and they can't link it to the person (BM). I am 100% convinced it is linked to all those things, but there isn't any evidence that it is and a good atty will make sure everybody knows that.

100% this. They've found a dart cap/sheath (on the second search of the house, iirc) that may or may not be linked to the crime.

Some posts above are speculating that it won't be important, but that opinion seems at odds with the statements of the prosecutor at the close of the prelim.

I think it's clear they believe it's important to their theory of the case, and jmo but I see some big issues with it.

 

[Spartygirl]

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

HA!! I'd like to buy a vowel, please

but right... his whole demeanor, not publicly speaking and asking for help in FINDING his missing wife plus ..... well...you know..everything else he did NOT do along with all of his lies.

SMH at this whole charade of "Im innocent" BS

 

[Seattle1]

100% this. They've found a dart cap/sheath (on the second search of the house, iirc) that may or may not be linked to the crime.

Some posts above are speculating that it won't be important, but that opinion seems at odds with the statements of the prosecutor at the close of the prelim.

I think it's clear they believe it's important to their theory of the case, and jmo but I see some big issues with it.

Generally, in a 1st-degree murder case where the husband is accused of killing his wife, and where the ME has conducted an autopsy and provided a cause of death, all who are saying how the prosecution is over the top in wanting to introduce expert testimony about an Rx needle sheath found inside the couples clothes dryer when for example, the cause of death was determined as a gunshot wound to the head, I'd say they have a valid argument!

However, unlike what the defense wants all to believe, this is not a missing-person case.

It's a murder case without both a body or a cause of death.

By the very nature of a no-body homicide, the prosecution has little choice here but to speculate and infer how evidence located in and around the couples property, especially evidence that's unique in use to the husband, might be connected to the wife's death.

Granted, while introducing speculation and/or a theory about how a tranquilizer could have been used to sedate SM -- leaving the tranquilizer needle sheath behind in the clothes dryer, would likely not be inadmissible during the typical murder trial, the prosecution would certainly be allowed to speculate about the sheath in both their opening and closing statements to the jurors!

If that's what the prosecution is left with, then so be it.

Some best recall how a story begins and how it ends than the events in between.

MOO

 

[Aloe]

The use of tranq dart (or not) are not important in this case. Evidence suggests he did use one, but does not prove that theory. The way in which Barry killed Suzanne does not matter in proving his guilt. The forced alibi on the wrong day, saying the marriage was perfect, sex and steak dinner on Saturday, phone and location data Saturday night /Sunday morning, planted bike/helmet, trash dumps, and his interviews prove his guilt. No need to prove how Suzanne died. There is more than enough evidence without formulating theories or possibilities.

Amen to that ^

 

[DeDee]

The judge illustrates to me the structural judicial issues around domestic abuse.

The judge swims in a patriarchal culture to such an extent that he does not see the wood from the trees and then wonders "where the evidence is"

We always come back to this idea that there is some normal level of strife in a marraige and unless SM turned up with a black eye, then talk of abuse is somehow too prejudicial

Kafka IMO

PBBM

My daughter phoned home from Crested Butte recently whining about the ski instructor's difficulty with her. I told her that if she's skiing down a slope and she sees trees then all she will see are trees. I instructed her to watch the snow paths, the trails, and she should do well.

Judge Lama, it seems, is missing and cannot see the main premeditated motives and depraved indifference for Suzanne's death by murder which are: Suzanne's Money and BM's Freedom to search for cute, young girls.
.

 

[Aloe]

Though: Who does handle disposable syringes at home and is able, to lose a sheath at all?

Usually I'll find the needle with the sheath on, but once in a while I'll find the sheath only with the bare needle MIA, Yikes!

 

[OldCop]

This makes me sick to even think about. He was probably running it through his head at the hotel too. Just rehearsing it all to make sure he did it just right.

Yeah, and he could practice his facial expressions in the hotel mirror, too.

 

[MassGuy]

The use of tranq dart (or not) are not important in this case. Evidence suggests he did use one, but does not prove that theory. The way in which Barry killed Suzanne does not matter in proving his guilt. The forced alibi on the wrong day, saying the marriage was perfect, sex and steak dinner on Saturday, phone and location data Saturday night /Sunday morning, planted bike/helmet, trash dumps, and his interviews prove his guilt. No need to prove how Suzanne died. There is more than enough evidence without formulating theories or possibilities.

Exactly. Some people don't buy the tranquilizer theory for some reason, and seem to think that disproving its use somehow exonerates Barry.

Believe it or don't believe it, Barry still murdered Suzanne on that Saturday afternoon.

We know the who.

We know the what.

We know the when.

We know the where.

We know the why.

Not being sure of the how, doesn't change anything. Barry tells us the answer, but some will selectively ignore this, and just listen to him on other occasions, when it suits them.

Because that makes sense...

Imagine being fooled by a pathological liar, when you know he is a pathological liar.

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

Yeah, and he could practice his facial expressions in the hotel mirror, too.

He really nailed the disingenuous furrowed brow thing.

 

[sassyblue]

He really nailed the disingenuous furrowed brow thing.

But his quavering whimper needs some work.

 

[Kemug]

If only a spy pen was inside the backpack that he carried into his hotel room! In addition to rehearsing -- BM seems to me to be the type of guy who talks to himself out loud.

(We know from his interviews with Agent Grusing that he'd tell himself how to respond to SM)....

Re talking to himself out loud - some of you may be following the case of missing person Paddy Moriarty in Australia. We have just learnt that police bugged the home of a suspect, and he is caught saying some pretty incriminating things to himself. Robert Durst likewise incriminated himself. I would hope that LE may be bugging Barry's home.

 

[crhedBngr]

He really nailed the disingenuous furrowed brow thing.

Good thing, because he's running out of Botox money, thanks to his defense costs.

JMVHO.

 

[MemPat]

But his quavering whimper needs some work.

Give the boy a break.....Quavering Whimpers require a real degree!

 

[PaulaDC]

I wonder how many times he practiced his grand entrance on the drive back from Broomfield.

So many that his quiver voice sucked. moo

 

[Aloe]

PBBM

My daughter phoned home from Crested Butte recently whining about the ski instructor's difficulty with her. I told her that if she's skiing down a slope and she sees trees then all she will see are trees. I instructed her to watch the snow paths, the trails, and she should do well.

Judge Lama, it seems, is missing and cannot see the main premeditated motives and depraved indifference for Suzanne's death by murder which are: Suzanne's Money and BM's Freedom to search for cute, young girls.
.

As well, Judge Lama cannot see the cause of her death: Intimate Partner Violence.

 

[Aloe]

To reiterate, in order to inject Suzanne, a dart and shooting device were not necessary. A needle and syringe were all that was required.
There are probably many substances that could have killed, tranquilized or put SM into a state of shock, injected or otherwise. Just because BM had some expired animal tranquilizer on hand does not mean he had to have used them. I'll bet BM knew how to obtain any black-marketables he would need. MOO

 

[susiQ]

Yeah, and he could practice his facial expressions in the hotel mirror, too.

Such a waste of Bare’s time. All that effort practicing his entrance and his performance still fell flat. Cringe worthy flat..He obviously was not involved in the Drama Club at Purdue . AND, then he upped his “game” and gave us an equally sketchy and cringe worthy performance during his “appeal” for SM, where he cleverly shifted to the abduction scenario because he’d realized the mountain lion wasn’t going to hunt, so to speak.

Bare’s hubris got him to where he is now. All his lies will get him behind bars, with a little luck!

Oh Bare!

 

[mrjitty]

100% this. They've found a dart cap/sheath (on the second search of the house, iirc) that may or may not be linked to the crime.

Some posts above are speculating that it won't be important, but that opinion seems at odds with the statements of the prosecutor at the close of the prelim.

I think it's clear they believe it's important to their theory of the case, and jmo but I see some big issues with it.

BIB

If you are referring to me, what I am saying is that the evidence is important, but not as a detailed theory.

It's is BM's response to the evidence that increases the likelihood of guilt.

 

[mrjitty]

Generally, in a 1st-degree murder case where the husband is accused of killing his wife, and where the ME has conducted an autopsy and provided a cause of death, all who are saying how the prosecution is over the top in wanting to introduce expert testimony about an Rx needle sheath found inside the couples clothes dryer when for example, the cause of death was determined as a gunshot wound to the head, I'd say they have a valid argument!

However, unlike what the defense wants all to believe, this is not a missing-person case.

It's a murder case without both a body or a cause of death.

By the very nature of a no-body homicide, the prosecution has little choice here but to speculate and infer how evidence located in and around the couples property, especially evidence that's unique in use to the husband, might be connected to the wife's death.

Granted, while introducing speculation and/or a theory about how a tranquilizer could have been used to sedate SM -- leaving the tranquilizer needle sheath behind in the clothes dryer, would likely not be inadmissible during the typical murder trial, the prosecution would certainly be allowed to speculate about the sheath in both their opening and closing statements to the jurors!

If that's what the prosecution is left with, then so be it.

Some best recall how a story begins and how it ends than the events in between.

MOO

BIB - Exactly!

I think it's important that we keep coming back to the mechanics of trial.

Defence counsel is not allowed to speculate explanations for suspicious facts while examining witnesses. Nor can defence witnesses speculate such answers. Only BM can explain these questions and he already gave some highly suspicious answers.

Meanwhile prosecution need only draw attention to all these suspicious coincidences and lies. Just one example:

... in closing the prosecution may well ask, why was no tranq solution found if deer were shot in April? Well BM said he threw it away on the already highly suspicious dumping runs. He didn't say he ran out. He said he threw it away on the very day his wife went missing. Well what a coincidence! Is this credible? How can we explain this? etc

 

[FromGermany1]

Didn't Barry say no one knows the truth?

It's like he wants sympathy for what he was forced to do.

That it gave him no pleasure.

Just putting a diseased doe down.

Done it his whole life. 100%.

Only this was no doe. She was healthy, she was human, and he wasn't licensed.

I hope the spy pen audio is clear enough that Suzanne's voice gets played at trial. It's the only voice she has left.

If not for BM, she'd be alive right now, living her best life.

JMO

bbm
I remember it. If he already planned to never speak the truth to whom ever, then it is clear, that no one would know the truth for a long time. What was "the truth": Suzanne having a lover, wanted a divorce and demanded her money back? Allegedly he didn't know of JL at that time. Did he nearly accidentially spill the beans?
Btw: I would like to know, what he would have told, if someone had promised him immunity .......