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

[K9Enzo]

What's up with the timing of these Twitter exchanges?

 

[MaisieBella]

A witness literally said just that, and it's clear from the AA that Barry thinks he's the smartest man in the room.

I mean, he would be, if that room was full of small children.

LOL!! Too true!

 

[Momofthreeboys]

None of the prosecution rebuttals have been posted or discussed either. Locals have gone and gotten defense motions as had media gotten them either from the courthouse or family or someone. Family is off limits for me personally so not going to comment on those aspects.

 

[Lyanna]

This family is the epitome of class...

Couldn't she have breached some motion of her brothers defence team by sharing those documents with Lauren and asking her to make it public? (In replies or whatever its called)
And WHY now is she speaking up, where has she been since May 2020 ?

 

[MassGuy]

People v. Morphew: Order re: D-17. "The Court concludes additional sanctions are not appropriate at this time. However, this Order will serve as the baseline for future orders related to discovery violations." The case
is set for trial 4/28/22.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/user...-17-C] SUPPLEMENT AND [D-17D] SUPPLEMENT.pdf

https://twitter.com/cocourts/status/1512501175031001090?s=21&t=Kz9vUEHYcAvsCELbGWhNOA
https://twitter.com/cocourts/status/1512501175031001090?s=21&t=Kz9vUEHYcAvsCELbGWhNOA

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/cocourts/status/1512501175031001090?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

People v. Morphew: Order re: D-17. "The Court concludes additional sanctions are not appropriate at this time. However, this Order will serve as the baseline for future orders related to discovery violations." The case
is set for trial 4/28/22. courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file…https://www.courts.state.co.us/user...-17-C] SUPPLEMENT AND [D-17D] SUPPLEMENT.pdf

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/marcsallinger/status/1512501983944462337?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

BREAKING: Judge in Suzanne Morphew case declines to dismiss murder charges against Barry Morphew. Barry’s defense had asked judge multiple times to dismiss charges against him, citing insufficient evidence and wrongdoings by prosecutors. Trial is set to begin 4/28/22

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/spencersoicher/status/1512502304259260417?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

Barry Morphew’s murder trial is still on, despite judge finding a “continuing pattern” by prosecutors of “negligent, and arguably, reckless” disregard to abide by court orders @krdonc13 #BarryMorphew

 

[Hazelnutty]

https://twitter.com/marcsallinger/status/1512501983944462337?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

BREAKING: Judge in Suzanne Morphew case declines to dismiss murder charges against Barry Morphew. Barry’s defense had asked judge multiple times to dismiss charges against him, citing insufficient evidence and wrongdoings by prosecutors. Trial is set to begin 4/28/22

Bam!

 

[Seattle1]

[URL='https://twitter.com/LaurenScharfTV']Lauren Scharf@LaurenScharfTV[/URL]

Replying to
@*************
Hi Marcy, I have requested all of the motions, exhibits, and orders filed this week. I am still waiting to receive them and once I do from the court, then I will report on those. That video is from a week ago.

6:44 AM · Apr 8, 2022

Replying to
@LaurenScharfTV
Hi Lauren, Thank you for responding here. I had to respond to last week’s video because you haven’t reported on the April 5th motion yet. It is public and available. If you cannot obtain it, I can send it to you. I beg you to make the entire April 5th document available.

7:05 AM · Apr 8, 2022

Lauren Scharf@LaurenScharfTV

Replying to
@*************
You can send the motion to me in my inbox, so I can review it, but I’m still waiting for my request for these documents from the court.

7:11 AM · Apr 8, 2022

ETA: Take note that LS is referring to the ROA from the Court detailing numerous filings for the period April 1-5, 2022.

 

[Skigh]

https://twitter.com/marcsallinger/status/1512501983944462337?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

BREAKING: Judge in Suzanne Morphew case declines to dismiss murder charges against Barry Morphew. Barry’s defense had asked judge multiple times to dismiss charges against him, citing insufficient evidence and wrongdoings by prosecutors. Trial is set to begin 4/28/22

I nearly had a major panic as I ,at first misread it and missed out the word declines!!

Need to pour a glass of wine!!

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/marcsallinger/status/1512503104733818883?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

Here’s the full order written by Judge Lama declining to impose additional sanctions, including dismissal of the case.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/user...-17-C] SUPPLEMENT AND [D-17D] SUPPLEMENT.pdf

 

[Hazelnutty]

Barry is certainly getting SUZANNE'S money's worth with this defense team.

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/carolamckinley/status/1512504282456592387?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

BREAKING: Judge Ramsey Lama in murder case of Barry Morphew says trial will go on - defense asked for dismissal. Judge says no BUT says prosecution had a pattern of discovery violations which were "reckless" although the violations weren't "willful"-they didn't do this on purpose

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/spencersoicher/status/1512502304259260417?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

Barry Morphew’s murder trial is still on, despite judge finding a “continuing pattern” by prosecutors of “negligent, and arguably, reckless” disregard to abide by court orders @krdonc13 #BarryMorphew

Court Order [D-17] by Judge Lama -- pgs 1-20 at link below:

https://www.courts.state.co.us/user... interest/21CR78/supplement d17e 12 pages.pdf

 

[swedeheart]

I nearly had a major panic as I ,at first misread it and missed out the word declines!!

Need to pour a glass of wine!!

Cheers!

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1512506163476459520?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

Judge Ramsey Lama files an order to have #BarryMorphew go to trial for the first-degree murder of his wife Suzanne despite a pattern of violations from the prosecution. The court has sanctioned the prosecution by not allowing 11/16 of the state's experts to testify as experts.

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/carolamckinley/status/1512506844987625475?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

Some of the witnesses which had been excluded before may testify now, but not as experts. This includes the cellphone expert and one of the CBI DNA experts. One half-win for prosecution - forensic computer data expert and telematics exp may testify but as lay witnesses

https://twitter.com/carolamckinley/status/1512507088085258241?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

Bottom line, the show will go on, with a somewhat crippled prosecution on April 28. This was a development that both sides were on pins and needles waiting for...not having the experts is big.

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1512507622645125121?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

The court did not find any willful misconduct on the part of the prosecution however the judge did point out they were negligent and arguably, reckless. The court will not be reducing #BarryMorphew charges or bond. There will not be additional sanctions. Trial set for April 28.

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/carolamckinley/status/1512504282456592387?s=21&t=KgHtEZXwjDqWQGe2coBKGg

BREAKING: Judge Ramsey Lama in murder case of Barry Morphew says trial will go on - defense asked for dismissal. Judge says no BUT says prosecution had a pattern of discovery violations which were "reckless" although the violations weren't "willful"-they didn't do this on purpose

^^bbm

Exactly.

Deja vu of Judge Murphy reminding the defense that the defense not being able to open a Discovery file is not the equivalent of the prosecution willfully, failing to provide the Discovery to the defense.

IMO, not having read the Court's Order [D-17], I believe the prosecution has been tardy in following up with each Agency to obtain all the Discovery and turn it over to the defense. In other words, the prosecution did deliver it to the defense as soon as they received it (as required by Rule 16), albeit the same had been sitting around at the Agency for months prior to the prosecution receiving the data.

Like it or not, the prosecution has to babysit these agencies since they are ultimately responsible. It's not enough to ask them once -- it's following up every month up until the trial, confirming that they've submitted everything!

MOO