Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee Co, 10 May 2020 *Case dismissed w/o prejudice* *found in 2023* #115

[MassGuy]

Respectfully, knowing is different than assuming. Barrys phone went in airplane on many occasions (friday night for 6 hours) that week(end) and you can't assume to know exactly what he was doing on Saturday when he switched it to airplane mode. He could have been destroying evidence from a Friday murder, or going places he didn't want discovered.

Suzanne texted Barry on May 6 2020 ( first text in 3 months between them) that she was done. She was afraid of Barry ,stated in text to multiple people. She was conned into thinking he was going to divorce. He had this planned, probably since they moved to colorado. Classic isolation and abusive domestic murder of a spouse wanting a divorce. I believe she was murdered Fri.Everything after with her phone is staging- and his girlfriend could have been an accomplice with Suzannes phone at a diffetent location if needed. I don't believe she would go to moonlight pizza for carryout (covid) in barrys truck alone with barry. I don't believe she would look at houses for sale with Barry. I don't believe she would change her Facebook password and try to "friend" 20 men, while in the middle of an attempted civil divorce. I don't believe she agree to a private veggie soup lunch date on Saturday. I don't think she would wanna hike anywhere with barry. I don't believe she texted - do we have summer tires for the range rover. I don't think she texted pick up hot tub chemicals for the nonfunctioning hot tub. I don't believe she was sunbathing and taking selfies in her bikini on a 45 degree day with 20 mph winds at 9000 elevation. I dont believe she would be sexually aroused on Saturday (last cancer treatment monday) to ask her lover to strip down naked on whatsapp, especially with her suspicion of Barry spying on her. I believe Suzanne was murdered Friday.

The Linkedin logs would show what device was connected at the time, and there is zero chance in hell Barry could fake a conversation pretending to be Suzanne. Her best friend would have realized, JL would have realized. Even a highly intelligent person couldn't do that, as there is context that only the parties know, context that Barry wouldn't be privy to.

It also makes zero sense for Barry to have done that, as it does nothing to further proof of life. If he had the ability to do something like that, then he could have "kept Suzanne alive" while he was in Broomfield on Sunday. That was the single most important time period in this whole thing, as her phone last pings as he's leaving the house, and there is zero communication in any form from then on.

Yes some of the communications seem odd to us, but that means little when you consider what I just said.

 

[mrjitty]

If BM had logged in to her LI, his machine ID etc would have been captured as a 2nd device logged in on the LI network.

This theory doesn't hold water unless someone can explain how he got around that issue IMO.

 

[MrsWatson]

We've seen some of the pictures Suzanne sent to JL during the Saturday sunbathing session. Those have time stamps that would prove Suzanne was still alive Saturday.

 

[bighousesmallroom]

The Linkedin logs would show what device was connected at the time, and there is zero chance in hell Barry could fake a conversation pretending to be Suzanne. Her best friend would have realized, JL would have realized. Even a highly intelligent person couldn't do that, as there is context that only the parties know, context that Barry wouldn't be privy to.

It also makes zero sense for Barry to have done that, as it does nothing to further proof of life. If he had the ability to do something like that, then he could have "kept Suzanne alive" while he was in Broomfield on Sunday. That was the single most important time period in this whole thing, as her phone last pings as he's leaving the house, and there is zero communication in any form from then on.

Yes some of the communications seem odd to us, but that means little when you consider what I just said.

Barry used Suzanne's phone. He did a terrible job of acting like Suzanne. Some of it was to prolong life, most with jeff is trying to determine who he is.50 messages to Jeff on saturday. Historical messages between them were paragraphs of meaningful messages. On Fri evening/saturday they were averaging 4 words in rapid succession. The " Wanna get naked on Whatsapp" message is Barry simply trying to determine who jeff is and get a visual. He would simply point Suzanne's phone away- and get a video of jeff. Just like the Facebook requests. Suzanne wanted civility, not to piss off the historical physically abusive controlling husband. There is no poking the bear- she was conned into thinking he might actually divorce.

The photo of Suzanne sunbathing sent to jeff on saturday wuth suzannes phone doesn't meet the requirements for proof of life. It is cropped, background whited out edited, and most importantly contains no timestamp.

The photo of Barry in line at moonlight pizza has been deleted from the PH trial transcripts, as well. Suzanne would not have went to get carry out pizza with barry on Friday night. Barry sent that to his daughters as everything AOK.

 

[mrjitty]

Barry used Suzanne's phone. He did a terrible job of acting like Suzanne. Some of it was to prolong life, most with jeff is trying to determine who he is.50 messages to Jeff on saturday. Historical messages between them were paragraphs of meaningful messages. On Fri evening/saturday they were averaging 4 words in rapid succession. The " Wanna get naked on Whatsapp" message is Barry simply trying to determine who jeff is and get a visual. He would simply point Suzanne's phone away- and get a video of jeff. Just like the Facebook requests. Suzanne wanted civility, not to piss off the historical physically abusive controlling husband. There is no poking the bear- she was conned into thinking he might actually divorce.

The photo of Suzanne sunbathing sent to jeff on saturday wuth suzannes phone doesn't meet the requirements for proof of life. It is cropped, background whited out edited, and most importantly contains no timestamp.

The photo of Barry in line at moonlight pizza has been deleted from the PH trial transcripts, as well. Suzanne would not have went to get carry out pizza with barry on Friday night. Barry sent that to his daughters as everything AOK.

He couldn't have used her phone

He was miles away on saturday when some of the conversations took place and her phone was always at the residence.

This theory just is not possible based on what we know.

 

[bighousesmallroom]

He couldn't have used her phone

He was miles away on saturday when some of the conversations took place and her phone was always at the residence.

This theory just is not possible based on what we know.

Barry's girlfriend could have. She had multiple motives- financial and relationship. I wouldn't say it's not possible solely based on logging into linked in. But you are entitled to your opinion as well.

The " did you leave"text supports this theory. I believe it was by mistake.

Suzanne wanted no part of Barry Morphew. Definitely not dates to the pizza place for takeout, lunch alone with him, looking at houses. I believe all those are staging.

ETA- regarding the photo Suzanne allegedly took and sent to the daughters at moonlight pizza. It would be interesting to know when the last time a Suzanne's phone took a photo of just Barry Morphew. I would bet a long time. No text or phone calls from Feb 4th to May 6th. They were living separate lives. No way she is wanting to hike alone with that monster. IMO

 

[Tragg]

More than one person can be unethical

In my view, it remains clearly unethical for JB, without evidence, to go on a podcast and accuse law enforcement officers and a medical practitioner of framing her client by a jiggered autopsy.

Where I come from you would risk being struck off for this, and you would obviously be disciplined. It's worth remembering JB presented no evidence in the preliminary proceedings for this claim. As far as I can see, it is a baseless smear.

MOO

Yes, if Byrialsen made her statement in a media interview likely to prejudice the civil or criminal proceedings, it could be grounds for an ethical complaint in Colorado under Rule 3.6 of the Code of Professional Responsibility - assuming without knowing that she has no factual basis for it (We know nothing about the chain of custody and whether any 11th JD personnel had an opportunity to contaminate Suzanne's remains.).

Here's the relevant text of the Rule:

3.6 (a) A lawyer who is participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation of a matter shall not make an extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be disseminated by means of public communication and will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter.

(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) and Rule 3.8(f), a lawyer may make a statement that a reasonable lawyer would believe is required to protect a client from the substantial undue prejudicial effect of recent publicity not initiated by the lawyer or the lawyer's client. A statement made pursuant to this paragraph shall be limited to such information as is necessary to mitigate the recent adverse publicity.

I like the Australian rule, and I have no reason to doubt your assessment that Byrialsen would be struck off in Australia.

However, under the Colorado rule a complaining party would have to show that Byrialsen's statement on a Danish podcast was substantially likely to materially prejudice the Colorado proceedings. IMO, that would be impossible unless the Danish podcast has a huge number of Colorado subscribers.

A complainant would also have to overcome Byrialsen's defense, that the statement was required to protect Morphew from the prejudicial effect of the release of the autopsy results showing BAM in Suzanne's bones. This might be possible, and I think it's telling that Byrialsen has not repeated the statement in American media.

 

[Tragg]

Bumping for those that missed the facts where the Court docket speaks for itself. And yes, IE was not only unethical but showed blatant disrespect for both the Court and her Colleagues. MOO



10th Circuit Rule 46.2, which states:

All attorneys, not previously admitted to the bar of this court, immediately upon filing a
case or entering an appearance in a case in this Court, shall obtain from the clerk the
necessary forms for admission upon written motion and shall promptly execute and return them.

Append for additions from MEDIA ONLY for ease of reference.

10/25/24 -- Without admission to practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, IE knowingly appealed the final judgement (USDC-Denver) entered on Sept 24, 2024 (Docs Nos 161, and 162).

11/08/24 -- Per 10th Cir. R. 46.1(A) and (D), IE knowingly filed an entry of appearance and certificate of interested party without admission to practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

11/12/24 -- IE was Noticed for Admissions per 10th Cir. R. 46.2, response set to 12/12/24. (First Notice).

Record reflects IE ignored the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, Admission Notices while continuing to practice in violation of 10th Cir. R. 46.2 until a Motion filed by Appellant BM for attorney IE to withdraw as counsel was filed on 1/15/2025. (Doc 53).

12/4/24-- IE knowingly filed 'Motion to Stay Appeal Pending District Court’s Ruling on a Motion for Indicative Ruling' (Doc 40), without admission to practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

12/9/24 -- IE knowingly filed 'Motion to Stay Appeal Pending District Court’s Ruling on a Motion for Indicative Ruling' (Doc 42), without admission to practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

12/16/24 -- Attorney admission letter, second notice sent. Attorney admission response date set to12/26/2024 for Iris Eytan. [24-1424] [Entered: 12/16/2024 10:42 AM]

12/20/24--IE knowingly responded to Defendants-Appellees’ Response to Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay Appeal Pending District Court’s Ruling on a Motion for Indicative Ruling (Doc 47), without admission to practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

1/2/25-- Attorney admission letter, third notice sent. Attorney admission response date set to 01/13/2025 for Iris Eytan. [24-1424] [Entered: 01/02/2025 11:41 AM]

1/15/25-- Order filed by Clerk of the Court granting appellant's attorney motion to withdraw as attorney. Appellant Morphew continues to be represented by attorneys Fisher, Fisher-Byrialsen, and Whitson. Served on 01/15/2025. Text only entry - no attachment. [24-1424]--[Edited 01/15/2025 by LG to correct typos] [Entered: 01/15/2025 11:32 AM]

Post in thread 'CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 , MEDIA,MAPS,TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*'

Oct 31, 2024

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:cod

ecf.cod.uscourts.gov

• Seattle1

• 

Post in thread 'CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 , MEDIA,MAPS,TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*'

Dec 11, 2024

RE: 24-1424, Morphew v. Chafee County, Colorado, et al
Dist/Ag docket: 1:23-CV-01108-DDD-JPO

RE: RECORDS INDICATE ATTORNEY IRIS EYTAN IS NOT A MEMBER OF THE 1OTH CIRCUIT-- NOTICE TO CURE OR ATTORNEY WILL BE STRICKEN FROM THE CASE.

11/12/24 - DOC #34 - ADMISSIONS LTR

• Seattle1

• 

Post in thread 'CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 , MEDIA,MAPS,TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*'

Dec 11, 2024

RE: 24-1424, Morphew v. Chafee County, Colorado, et al
Dist/Ag docket: 1:23-CV-01108-DDD-JPO

12/4/24 - DOC #40 - Motion to Stay Appeal Pending District Court’s Ruling
on a Motion for Indicative Ruling

• Seattle1

• 

Post in thread 'CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 , MEDIA,MAPS,TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*'

Dec 11, 2024

RE: 24-1424, Morphew v. Chafee County, Colorado, et al
Dist/Ag docket: 1:23-CV-01108-DDD-JPO

12/9/24 - DOC #42 - Motion to Stay Appeal Pending District Court’s Ruling
on a Motion for Indicative Ruling

• Seattle1

• 

My speculations could be wrong - they are speculations after all - but I don't see a signed entry of appearance for Eytan in the documents you provided here. The Notice of Appeal is signed by Byrialsen alone, under the signature block of her firm.

It's indisputable that Eytan entered an appearance knowing or not - the court ordered her to register.

The more significant issue IMO is whether Eytan's appearance in the 10th Circuit and her tardy withdrawal is a serious ethical issue as you have argued.

I respectfully disagree with that argument. The court has the power to sanction attorneys for violation of its rules, and to refer unethical behavior to the attorney disciplinary system. There is no evidence that happened and IMO, it won't happen. One of us could file a compliant I suppose, to test this proposition. If you do, please let us know the outcome.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

My speculations could be wrong - they are speculations after all - but I don't see a signed entry of appearance for Eytan in the documents you provided here. The Notice of Appeal is signed by Byrialsen alone, under the signature block of her firm.

It's indisputable that Eytan entered an appearance knowing or not - the court ordered her to register.

The more significant issue IMO is whether Eytan's appearance in the 10th Circuit and her tardy withdrawal is a serious ethical issue as you have argued.

I respectfully disagree with that argument. The court has the power to sanction attorneys for violation of its rules, and to refer unethical behavior to the attorney disciplinary system. There is no evidence that happened and IMO, it won't happen. One of us could file a compliant I suppose, to test this proposition. If you do, please let us know the outcome.

Agree. What's the point of filing a complaint? If the court were truly aggrieved they would have done something. For me it has very little meaning if she's on the appeals team or not and doesn't affect the trajectory of the case within the structure of the court. I'm sure she was originally brought in to the appeals team for her case knowledge and brain power. But in general it feels like a very minor technical issue not unethical in scope to meet sanctions level.

 

[Lyanna]

Dbm

 

[SortaSleuthy]

Barry used Suzanne's phone. He did a terrible job of acting like Suzanne. Some of it was to prolong life, most with jeff is trying to determine who he is.50 messages to Jeff on saturday. Historical messages between them were paragraphs of meaningful messages. On Fri evening/saturday they were averaging 4 words in rapid succession. The " Wanna get naked on Whatsapp" message is Barry simply trying to determine who jeff is and get a visual. He would simply point Suzanne's phone away- and get a video of jeff. Just like the Facebook requests. Suzanne wanted civility, not to piss off the historical physically abusive controlling husband. There is no poking the bear- she was conned into thinking he might actually divorce.

The photo of Suzanne sunbathing sent to jeff on saturday wuth suzannes phone doesn't meet the requirements for proof of life. It is cropped, background whited out edited, and most importantly contains no timestamp.

The photo of Barry in line at moonlight pizza has been deleted from the PH trial transcripts, as well. Suzanne would not have went to get carry out pizza with barry on Friday night. Barry sent that to his daughters as everything AOK.

MassGuy and mrjitty have done a great job in rebutting your theory that Barry killed her on Friday. I’ll add one more item.

When charges were filed they included that he killed her on Saturday or Sunday.
… The FBI, State Patrol and Local authorities had access to the technical call data that you don’t.
… They are so sure about the timeframe they were willing to risk a mistrial if wrong.
… That means they have scientific proof!

 

[friendlysleuther]

Regardless of when he killed her,
he killed her.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Every time this thread pops up with new posts, I hope it's news that BM's been arrested.
I'm confident it will happen, so I'll just keep waiting for justice for Suzanne.

 

[friendlysleuther]

Every time this thread pops up with new posts, I hope it's news that BM's been arrested.
I'm confident it will happen, so I'll just keep waiting for justice for Suzanne.

So long overdue.. I pray that they’re actually working the details of his arrest & that they don’t let this slip through the cracks

 

[Niner]

Every time this thread pops up with new posts, I hope it's news that BM's been arrested.
I'm confident it will happen, so I'll just keep waiting for justice for Suzanne.

Me too!
Awaiting for the title to change from "Found Deceased" to "Re-arrested!!!"

 

[Megnut]

Me too!
Awaiting for the title to change from "Found Deceased" to "Re-arrested!!!"

Me too.

Waiting on a banner change

ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT

He's had time enough.

jmo

 

[LovesPeace2]

Me to. One day we will get surprised when MassGuy breaks the news that Barry's been arrested. A girl can dream jmvho

 

[friendlysleuther]

do we need to start a petition or something to get them to do something ??? Idk what the holdup is!

 

[Ontario Mom]

do we need to start a petition or something to get them to do something ??? Idk what the holdup is!

I'll trust the folks in charge are doing due diligence to see justice served.

 

[al66pine]

SM's Date of Death. Evidence at Trial?

MassGuy and mrjitty have done a great job in rebutting your theory that Barry killed her on Friday. I’ll add one more item.

When charges were filed they included that he killed her on Saturday or Sunday.
… The FBI, State Patrol and Local authorities had access to the technical call data that you don’t.
… They are so sure about the timeframe they were willing to risk a mistrial if wrong.
… That means they have scientific proof!

@SortaSleuthy
Not sure if I'm following ^ exactly. Let me rephrase.

Charges filed against def't allege that, on Sat or Sun def't injured victim, who died on Sat or Sun..
Is ^ post concluding that if prosecution's evidence show that vic. died on another day, say Fri or Mon, that prosecution faces a mistrial?

Or something else? Sorry if I am misunderstanding.
Heading to kitchen for coffee. : )