Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o Prejudice* #102

[mrjitty]

MOO IE is just (vigorously) following the defense game plan taught at law school.
1 Undemine witnesses
2 Supress evidence
3 Present an alternative theory

MOO Prosecution should have been ready for these tactics.

Spreading lies in the media and misleading the Court isn't taught at law school.

 

[mrjitty]

I'm interested in what you believe should happen in cases like BM's, where the DA does not meet deadlines and the defendant was released. Or, if you believe the DA concealed or manufactured evidence and then dismissed the case - what should happen to the lawyers involved?

RSBM - the Morphew case actually illustrates why IE's reforms are a bad idea.

First both Judge's accepted that the criminal prosecution was not in bad faith. There is no suggestion that the prosecution manufactured evidence, concealed exculpatory material etc. The discovery violations were bad, but more in the nature of dirty pool / bureaucratic SNAFU. The sanctions are designed to protect the criminal trial process generally, rather than as a "makeup call" to Barry personally.

So correctly it is the State of Colorado that pays the price, and an accused murderer facing credible evidence on which a jury could convict, walks on a technicality.

Justice was already done, and generously so, in the case of this defendant.

The idea that public servants should additionally face financial / criminal penalties in addition is dangerous in my opinion due to the chilling effect in prosecuting well heeled defendants who will then inevitably bring nuisance proceedings.

Unfortunately we do have edge cases where law enforcement behave in criminal ways and it is difficult to hold them accountable. But i failed to see what it has to do with this case.

 

[mrjitty]

Don't you think she has double standards though?
Talks about prosecutorial misconduct, yes there were errors made - but Iris wasn't exactly a Saint herself now was she? Embellishing plenty about the DNA, at one point victim blaming ( jmo )
She played dirty.
Her job was to defend Barry, ensure he received a fair trial and was treated fairly and his rights were protected - yet she muddied the waters with lies and smoke screens, overstepped the boundaries - isn't that a form of misconduct too? Isn't the court about finding the truth and seeking justice. Personally didn't feel she was looking for the truth, which could have helped Barry if he was innocent - probably because the truth is Barry murdered Suzanne, and Iris knows it, all she was left with was spinning the room, and she did that, and inappropriately too imo.
IANAL and am quite naive on these matters so quite likely wrong, but that's how I feel about it.

BIB - i agree, especially in the US context.

It seems par for the course that the defence attorney will now go beyond claiming their client is falsely accused, and actually accuse law enforcement and prosecutors of a conspiracy to frame their client. These claims are then backed up with obvious lies and distortions.

I don't understand why it is considered acceptable - especially because it waters down those claims in cases of genuine injustice. And let's face it. Those kinds of cases seldom involve well off white guys like the defendant.

Two follow up points on this:

First. Why would prosecutors want to take on a stitch up of a well resourced defendant in a nightmare no body case? They absolutely would not do so.

<modsnip: Insinuating LE corruption without any MSM or fact to support>

 

[katydid23]

Pretty routine for landscaping to occur on Sundays here. In fact I had my palm trees trimmed this past Sunday morning.

But that Broomfield job was not a typical private landscaping job. It was more of a contracting job, if I understand it correctly.

 

[GatorFL]

I don't think the principle of issue preclusion known as "collateral estoppel" will have much effect on the admissibility of evidence in the new case when it is filed.

SBM. In Stanley's motion to dismiss she indicated the sanctions would likely carry over to new charges.

 

[GatorFL]

Iris should brush up on her knowledge of the subject she so vociferously promotes. And the media should call her out when she spouts off without a source to prove or support her accusations. I really feel this case has sent her off the rails. Doesn't she have some other clients or business to attend to? The bar association should take a closer look at her behavior, IMO.

While she has a right to speak out, a loud mouth does not an expert make.
MOO

I'm sorry, she's an American and has 1st Amendment rights, one of which is freedom of speech. She's not spouting lies or information, instead she's advocating for change to the system that would likely be beneficial to all. JMO

 

[GatorFL]

BIB

Didn't the court just do this? Why do we need yet more laws?

And in the case of framing unsophisticated defendants, would these new laws really help them?

IMO this reform would mostly help well off guilty people avoid prosecution.

Absolute immunity excuses inexcusable behavior that ruins lives. It should be eliminated for prosecutors and judges. Why should anyone be absolutely immune from their misconduct? It just encourages more of it.

Pretty good reading here: Hold Prosecutors Accountable, Too - Boston Review

 

[Nikynoo]

Exactly why there needs to be accountability. The justice system is devolving into a big joke. And it works both ways: major charges with little evidence as well as prosecutors undercharging or not charging at all because of certain political agendas. If DA's were personally accountable all this nonsense would stop immediately.

I also think if DA's were not voted in, that would help too.

 

[WingsOverTX]

I'm sorry, she's an American and has 1st Amendment rights, one of which is freedom of speech. She's not spouting lies or information, instead she's advocating for change to the system that would likely be beneficial to all. JMO

Oh, I agree she has 1st Amendment rights.

I don't agree that her crusade is a righteous one. Why? Because she lies when she says there is no evidence against BM - sure there's no body but there is a rather arduous climb for any defense attorney to overcome the mountain of circumstantial evidence in this case.

IMO she has gone too far and should stop because her overreach related to this particular client and general lack of professionalism endangers her client, her bar standing & the search for justice.

So I will just have to respectfully disagree with your casting her as an "advocate for change to the system".

A crusader? Yes. A righteous one? No.

 JMO

 

[Trebor5591]

This is where he didn't act in character.

He should have entertained the possibility she had snuck off with her lover while he was out of town.

It's the most obvious thing - at least until the bike was found. The fact that he didn't mention this to LE is highly incriminating.

"He should have entertained the possibility she had snuck off with her lover while he was out of town."

I believe (not 100% certain) the married man she was having an affair with lived out of town--it was more a "telephone and text affair" as I recall. Also, I doubt she would have picked Mother's Day to sneak off to meet her paramour...since he was also married with children, likely he would not want to cheat on Mothers Day either--

 

[girlhasnoname]

Pretty routine for landscaping to occur on Sundays here. In fact I had my palm trees trimmed this past Sunday morning.

Actually no that is not the case here. They were to repair work on a retaining wall that BARE screwed up At some point. It is against code to perform this type of work on a weekend unless otherwise gaining permission PRE-work. Which of course he didn’t because this was a made up alibi.

Mother’s Day weekend during Covid didn’t fall into the ‘routine landscaping’ you mentioned.

moo

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Actually no that is not the case here. They were to repair work on a retaining wall that BARE screwed up At some point. It is against code to perform this type of work on a weekend unless otherwise gaining permission PRE-work. Which of course he didn’t because this was a made up alibi.

Mother’s Day weekend during Covid didn’t fall into the ‘routine landscaping’ you mentioned.

moo

More important was a no work on Sunday. For many states public construction jobs were exempt from Covid work stoppages and employees continued to work during Covid. I don’t know how Colorado was.

 

[girlhasnoname]

BARE got a reprieve, not a stay. I personally cannot wait until they refile the charges against him and slap him back in a cell for the rest of his life. He murdered his wife because she dared to defy him.

His high priced blowhard IE bent the rules just as much as she has claimed the State did. I hope she wipes out every penny BARE has before this is over.

moo
#Justice4Suzanne

 

[CGray123]

SBM. In Stanley's motion to dismiss she indicated the sanctions would likely carry over to new charges.

No, the MTD suggested that BM might have a collateral estoppel argument that could improve his legal defense options.

 

[mrjitty]

I'm sorry, she's an American and has 1st Amendment rights, one of which is freedom of speech. She's not spouting lies or information, instead she's advocating for change to the system that would likely be beneficial to all. JMO

1A has nothing to do with this situation.

When one is admitted to the bar, one assumes duties to the Court and is subject to the Law Society rules.

Each country is different, but falsely accusing the state of fitting up her client, knowingly misrepresenting evidence etc is the kind of conduct attorneys are not allowed to engage in, as officers of the court (at least under the rules I learned) - yet appears commonplace these days.

 

[Boxer]

BIB - i agree, especially in the US context.

It seems par for the course that the defence attorney will now go beyond claiming their client is falsely accused, and actually accuse law enforcement and prosecutors of a conspiracy to frame their client. These claims are then backed up with obvious lies and distortions.

I don't understand why it is considered acceptable - especially because it waters down those claims in cases of genuine injustice. And let's face it. Those kinds of cases seldom involve well off white guys like the defendant.

Two follow up points on this:

First. Why would prosecutors want to take on a stitch up of a well resourced defendant in a nightmare no body case? They absolutely would not do so.

Secondly, the much more common template is that corrupt cops sabotage these kinds of cases. This is what troubles me much more than IE's grandstanding. Did anyone intentionally hobble this case?

Exactly. Is it the DA can't make critical deadlines or the deadline extensions, or is it a dive.
The police in the Tom Fallis case did not do due diligence at the CS and in the investigation.
Possibly here we have same thing later in the process.
MOO another random DA would either not have brought charges yet, or be in trial right now with all 15 or 16 expert witness and a well put together case.

 

[CGray123]

Absolute immunity excuses inexcusable behavior that ruins lives. It should be eliminated for prosecutors and judges. Why should anyone be absolutely immune from their misconduct? It just encourages more of it.

Pretty good reading here: Hold Prosecutors Accountable, Too - Boston Review

Everyone - including Colorado prosecutors - have recognized that discovery fails have been a serious problem. It's undeniable. It not only harms individual defendants; it undermines public confidence in government. Prosecutors and defense counsel in Colorado have jointly proposed stronger ethical standards to address the problem.

The concern about abolishing immunity is exactly as @mrjitty stated: the unintended consequence is a fear of liability that paralyzes public officials. This will not improve the effectiveness of government. The contrary is true.

I think there's merit to this argument. We must find other ways to address the problem.

In BM's case, again @mrjitty has it right IMO. The discovery issues in this case have resulted from poor leadership (premature filing) and a staff and budget too small to manage the documents in a complex case. Both judges found that the discovery issues were not deliberate attempts to undermine the defense.

IE is now looking for a more favorable forum.

She's using her 15 minutes of fame to:

1. Promote her bill, which will not see the light of day;

2. Promote herself;

3. Tell BM and daughters, in effect, "Even though you owe me a lot of money and have not been acquitted, you have not spent in vain - together we will change the world!"

 

[Momofthreeboys]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>The trespass case was dropped I do believe. The issue originally was that SD was on the witness list for the murder case and would have her lawyer in the courtroom and available to advise her....her lawyer was a friend of Judge Murphy and Judge Murphy agreed with defense that it would be a conflict of interest so the situation had more to do with the murder case and SD as a witness than with her trespass case (which was dropped) is how I understood the situation. I'm open to correction if I missed something.

In my opinion the voter fraud case will go pretty quickly. He signed on the witness line. He claims to have thought he could do that. That's for me is the crux of the case. Somewhat similar to the former chair of the Colorado GOP who actually signed and submitted a ballot for his wife and received probation and community service. This man also said he did it and thought he could so a somewhat parallel story. We have no idea if he will plead guilty, do a plea deal or go all the way. I'm thinking a plea deal will be worked out and we'll hear about it some day. If prosecution and defense agree to the plea it isn't very often a judge won't sign off on the deal.

 

[Scootie98]

Exactly. Is it the DA can't make critical deadlines or the deadline extensions, or is it a dive.
The police in the Tom Fallis case did not do due diligence at the CS and in the investigation.
Possibly here we have same thing later in the process.
MOO another random DA would either not have brought charges yet, or be in trial right now with all 15 or 16 expert witness and a well put together case.

maybe the deadlines are unreasonable...particularly given the volume of evidence in this case?

 

[CGray123]

maybe the deadlines are unreasonable...particularly given the volume of evidence in this case?

The prosecutor MUST manage this. The defendant has a Constitutional right to a speedy trial. Every prosecutor knows that the case must be tried within six months after the entry of a not guilty plea. If that doesn't happen and the defendant doesn't agree to extend the time, the case is dismissed with prejudice. No excuses.

In this case, the recusal of Judge M effectively compressed the timeline for motions and deadlines, but still, the prosecution's obligations existed from the filing of the case.