Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #61 *ARREST*

[OldCop]

That was interesting that someone reminded of the fact that things like bleach and cleaners were hard to get due to Covid.
I'm wondering if the thought was that Chlorine was the next best thing.

Over here, in Australia, quite often one of the reasons a murderer is caught is a receipt from Bunnings where they bought things like tarps, cleaning stuff, gloves, shovels etc. All the sort of things that could be used for carting away a body.

Bunnings is a DIY, Garden and Hardware store and it's amazing how many times it features in cases of missing people here.

Here, in the US, it’s the receipts from Walmart that trip people up. I’m sure LE has examined receipts and security footage from the Walmart in Salida and the one near the HIE in Broomfield.
Maybe BM couldn’t get bleach at the local Walmart because of the shortage due to COVID-19. Maybe that’s why he paid a visit to Salida Stove and Spa Saturday afternoon according to JP. MG said he was shopping alone all over Salida that afternoon. Wonder if he purchased any Mother’s Day gifts during this shopping spree? MOO

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Thanks OldCop! I thought there'd be a similar store there.

The go to place for everything you need to disappear a person.

Here, in the US, it’s the receipts from Walmart that trip people up

 

[Seattle1]

Murphy is the Chief District Judge in the 11th District, and according to their website, in addition to Murphy, there are three other Judges who preside over the 11th district.

^^rsbm
There are three Judges over the 11th district but Murphy is the only Judge in Salida -- the other two are in Fairplay and Canon City. (Chaffee County also has one County Court Judge and a Magistrate). I believe the DA's office is located in Canon City.

 

[Murphy1950]

Any ideas out there?

All this time I thought that the “mechanical thingy” was related to the late-night situation of equipment running. I thought they had a ping/signal or something from his truck GPS or Bobcat that showed he was there. I am thinking now it was Saturday afternoon at that shop. No ping needed, an actual eye witness. Still not clear what JP was doing there, or Barry for that matter, if the owner wasn’t around.

There had to be a reason Lauren held back that video as long as she did.

 

[CGray123]

How many victims are allowed to peruse the AA before the general public? Are the siblings of Suzanne also considered victims? How about her step brother who clearly loved and treasured her? Someone asked a version of this last night, but I didn't see an answer.

If the court is going to produce documents as they did yesterday, how can they omit the definition of "victim"?

We all have our feelings about whether the judge applied a proper definition of "victim", and our own thoughts about what the law should be. But the definition of victim the court MUST apply is in the statute, which was enacted by the General Assembly and signed by the Governor. He cannot and did not make up his own.

Here are the statutory definitions of those the court has responsibility to protect under Colorado law:

24-41-302 (5) "Victim" means any natural person against whom any crime has been perpetrated or attempted, unless the person is accountable for the crime or a crime arising from the same conduct or plan as crime is defined under the laws of this state or of the United States, or, if such person is deceased or incapacitated, the person's spouse, parent, legal guardian, child, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, significant other, or other lawful representative. For purposes of notification under this part 3, any person under the age of eighteen years is considered incapacitated, unless that person is legally emancipated. It is the intent of the general assembly that this definition of the term "victim" shall apply only to this part 3 and shall not be applied to any other provision of the laws of the state of Colorado that refer to the term "victim".

(6) "Victim's immediate family" means the spouse, any child by birth or adoption, any stepchild, the parent, the stepparent, a sibling, a legal guardian, significant other, or a lawful representative of the victim.

(7) "Witness" means any natural person:

(a) Having knowledge of the existence or nonexistence of facts relating to any crime;
(b) Whose declaration under oath is received or has been received as evidence for any purpose;
(c) Who has reported any crime to any peace officer, correctional officer, or judicial officer;
(d) Who has been served with a subpoena issued under the authority of any court in this state, of any other state, or of the United States; or
(e) Who would be believed by any reasonable person to be an individual described in paragraph (a), (b), (c), or (d) of this subsection (7).

 

[fcavanaugh]

^^rsbm
There are three Judges over the 11th district but Murphy is the only Judge in Salida -- the other two are in Fairplay and Canon City. (Chaffee County also has one County Court Judge and a Magistrate). I believe the DA's office is located in Canon City.

Thank you @Seattle1, that’s very helpful info. I lack sufficient knowledge in this area, so does this mean since the crime is alleged to have happened in Maysville, Chaffee County, that Murphy likely signed the arrest warrant being Maysville borders Salida, or could any of the Judges that oversee the 11th District sign the warrant regardless of which city/s they’re in i.e., Canon City. It does seem
to make sense Murphy likely signed it based on where crime is alleged to have occurred and where proceedings are being held. As previously stated, I’m just glad a Judge felt there was enough probable cause to arrest BM and he’s now sitting where he belongs.
Hopefully my question makes sense the way I’m asking it.
TIA.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

 

[CGray123]

<modsnip> I'm rather perturbed that the judge is not focusing on the heinous nature of the crime and bending more toward the state's rights than the defendant's or staying neutral.

What say you?

IMO, the rights of SM, her daughters, and the community can only be vindicated by the successful AND LAWFUL prosecution of the person charged. Until a conviction is entered, Judge Murphy's role with respect to the defense is to assure that BM gets a fair trial in accordance with the law. The nature of the crime and the harm already suffered has nothing to do with the decision he just made. Just because he agreed with defense arguments in issuing this temporary order closing the affidavit does not signify that he lacks the impartiality appropriate to his role. IMO.

 

[PawneeDew]

Well the preliminary falls generally in favor of the prosecution so if they can't get this case to trial there won't be a trial and no need to "worry" about an appeal.

Aghhhh! Why is there no unlike button??

 

[NuttMegg]

We all have our feelings about whether the judge applied a proper definition of "victim", and our own thoughts about what the law should be. But the definition of victim the court MUST apply is in the statute, which was enacted by the General Assembly and signed by the Governor. He cannot and did not make up his own.

Here are the statutory definitions of those the court has responsibility to protect under Colorado law:

24-41-302 (5) "Victim" means any natural person against whom any crime has been perpetrated or attempted, unless the person is accountable for the crime or a crime arising from the same conduct or plan as crime is defined under the laws of this state or of the United States, or, if such person is deceased or incapacitated, the person's spouse, parent, legal guardian, child, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, significant other, or other lawful representative. For purposes of notification under this part 3, any person under the age of eighteen years is considered incapacitated, unless that person is legally emancipated. It is the intent of the general assembly that this definition of the term "victim" shall apply only to this part 3 and shall not be applied to any other provision of the laws of the state of Colorado that refer to the term "victim".

(6) "Victim's immediate family" means the spouse, any child by birth or adoption, any stepchild, the parent, the stepparent, a sibling, a legal guardian, significant other, or a lawful representative of the victim.

(7) "Witness" means any natural person:

(a) Having knowledge of the existence or nonexistence of facts relating to any crime;
(b) Whose declaration under oath is received or has been received as evidence for any purpose;
(c) Who has reported any crime to any peace officer, correctional officer, or judicial officer;
(d) Who has been served with a subpoena issued under the authority of any court in this state, of any other state, or of the United States; or
(e) Who would be believed by any reasonable person to be an individual described in paragraph (a), (b), (c), or (d) of this subsection (7).

Thanks. I got kind of burned by the concept of victims' rights in the Watts case, when the parents of the confessed murderer and at the same time grandparents of the children he murdered were given representation at the sentencing, and then later the mother of the murderer was seen/heard on video saying that the victims' advocate did not really speak for them, and that the mother admittedly did and said anything she had to do to get to see her murderer son, and used the victims' law to get access to him. Long sentence, I know!

Some people think that because the parents/grandparents got themselves declared victims, that set up sort of a strange situation where the "victims" (the parents) were outwardly working to get the perpetrator free.

But, at least from the def. of victim above: " "Victim" means any natural person against whom any crime has been perpetrated or attempted, unless the person is accountable for the crime or a crime arising from the same conduct or plan as crime is defined under the laws of this state or of the United States" meaning, I hope, that he can't claim to be due victim status from something he himself did or something done to him, ie get arrested, making him a victim of overzealous LE. But so far he isn't "accountable" so maybe he can also get victims' rights up to being found (I hope) guilty? Another roundabout thought, but he can't be declared a victim because his wife was killed. I think.

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Any ideas out there?

All this time I thought that the “mechanical thingy” was related to the late-night situation of equipment running. I thought they had a ping/signal or something from his truck GPS or Bobcat that showed he was there. I am thinking now it was Saturday afternoon at that shop. No ping needed, an actual eye witness. Still not clear what JP was doing there, or Barry for that matter, if the owner wasn’t around.

There had to be a reason Lauren held back that video as long as she did.

I think he was comfortable stopping there. I think we all knew he did subcontract work for them so they were probably comfortable letting him stop and use a tool or two. Listening to the language he used with Lauren I discounted what ever minor repair or switch out he did and for me the “time” of day he did that and omitted from his original conversation with LE felt more important than whatever he was messing around with. I feel the same way about the brick wall. I don’t think the wall itself plays a role other than the “reason” for going to Broomfield. In some cases for me some of the PE red flags were more likely red herrings or totally innocuous moments that captured the public’s interest and if LE spent a bunch of time on these red herrings it probably just angered them more.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

<modsnip - deleted broken quote>

New DA and maybe she’s not used to the judge’s personality or procedures. He might be helping her along to fix what needs to be fixed so everyone is on equal footing. Has she practiced in these courts before? Then she should know from the other defense side what is expected.

 

[Seattle1]

Thank you @Seattle1, that’s very helpful info. I lack knowledge in this area, so does this mean since the crime is alleged to have happened in Maysville, Chaffee County, that Murphy likely signed the arrest warrant being Maysville borders Salida, or could any of the Judges that oversee the 11th District sign the warrant regardless of which city/s they’re in i.e., Canon City. It does seem to make sense Murphy likely signed it based on where crime is alleged to have occurred and where proceedings are being held.
Hopefully my question makes sense the way I’m asking it.
TIA.

IMHOO

#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne

I believe it's most likely the Salida-based Judge Murphy that signed the warrant.
The arrest warrant would command for any LE to bring BM without any unnecessary delay to appear before a Judge of the County Court to be dealt with according to the law. We know that LE delivered BM to Chaffee County where he first appeared on May 6 before Judge Murphy.

The confusion here might be that the 11th Judicial District includes several small counties besides Chaffee-- also includes Custer, Fremont, and Park.

MOO

 

[Gigi3]

<modsnip - deleted broken quote>

I don’t think we need to worry just yet (at least I hope not).
We need to remember that it wasn’t just local LE handling this case. The sheriff called in the CBI and FBI very early on, and having followed recent cases in Colorado that included these agencies, I have great confidence that they can handle this!

Like I said before, the defense is going to provide any argument they can to prevent the release of this AA. They will want to delay and keep out as much as possible. Why? I think it’s going to shine a very negative light on their client!
JMO.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

I don’t think we need to worry just yet (at least I hope not).
We need to remember that it wasn’t just local LE handling this case. The sheriff called in the CBI and FBI very early on, and having followed recent cases in Colorado that included these agencies, I have great confidence that they can handle this!

Like I said before, the defense is going to provide any argument they can to prevent the release of this AA. They will want to delay and keep out as much as possible. Why? I think it’s going to shine a very negative light on their client!
JMO.

Judge grants the defense’s request? One less issue on appeal.

 

[Seattle1]

We all have our feelings about whether the judge applied a proper definition of "victim", and our own thoughts about what the law should be. But the definition of victim the court MUST apply is in the statute, which was enacted by the General Assembly and signed by the Governor. He cannot and did not make up his own.

Here are the statutory definitions of those the court has responsibility to protect under Colorado law:

24-41-302 (5) "Victim" means any natural person against whom any crime has been perpetrated or attempted, unless the person is accountable for the crime or a crime arising from the same conduct or plan as crime is defined under the laws of this state or of the United States, or, if such person is deceased or incapacitated, the person's spouse, parent, legal guardian, child, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, significant other, or other lawful representative. For purposes of notification under this part 3, any person under the age of eighteen years is considered incapacitated, unless that person is legally emancipated. It is the intent of the general assembly that this definition of the term "victim" shall apply only to this part 3 and shall not be applied to any other provision of the laws of the state of Colorado that refer to the term "victim".

(6) "Victim's immediate family" means the spouse, any child by birth or adoption, any stepchild, the parent, the stepparent, a sibling, a legal guardian, significant other, or a lawful representative of the victim.

(7) "Witness" means any natural person:

(a) Having knowledge of the existence or nonexistence of facts relating to any crime;
(b) Whose declaration under oath is received or has been received as evidence for any purpose;
(c) Who has reported any crime to any peace officer, correctional officer, or judicial officer;
(d) Who has been served with a subpoena issued under the authority of any court in this state, of any other state, or of the United States; or
(e) Who would be believed by any reasonable person to be an individual described in paragraph (a), (b), (c), or (d) of this subsection (7).

Section 24-4.1-303 - Procedures for ensuring rights of victims of crimes

(1) Law enforcement agencies, prosecutorial agencies, judicial agencies, and correctional agencies shall ensure that victims of crimes are afforded the rights described in section 24-4.1-302.5.

I don't believe the definition of victim here matters (i.e., whether daughter or stranger witness) but that under Colorado Statute, it's the judicial agency (i.e., the Judge of the County Court) LE, and prosecutorial agencies (i.e., District DA), etc., primarily responsible for ensuring the rights of victims of crimes as described in the applicable statute.

It follows that the Judge is adhering to his agency's responsibility in deciding to delay public access to the AA until after the Preliminary Hearing. MOO

 

[CGray123]

Thanks. I got kind of burned by the concept of victims' rights in the Watts case, when the parents of the confessed murderer and at the same time grandparents of the children he murdered were given representation at the sentencing, and then later the mother of the murderer was seen/heard on video saying that the victims' advocate did not really speak for them, and that the mother admittedly did and said anything she had to do to get to see her murderer son, and used the victims' law to get access to him. Long sentence, I know!

Some people think that because the parents/grandparents got themselves declared victims, that set up sort of a strange situation where the "victims" (the parents) were outwardly working to get the perpetrator free.

But, at least from the def. of victim above: " "Victim" means any natural person against whom any crime has been perpetrated or attempted, unless the person is accountable for the crime or a crime arising from the same conduct or plan as crime is defined under the laws of this state or of the United States" meaning, I hope, that he can't claim to be due victim status from something he himself did or something done to him, ie get arrested, making him a victim of overzealous LE. But so far he isn't "accountable" so maybe he can also get victims' rights up to being found (I hope) guilty? Another roundabout thought, but he can't be declared a victim because his wife was killed. I think.

I am not familiar with the details of the Watts case, but if Watt's mother used the VW law and her status as grandparent of the murdered children to gain visits with her son in jail, I would not be troubled by that or find it strange. I don't believe that BM could claim rights as a victim while in the status of defendant (or convicted murderer). MOO.

 

[sk716]

Haven't caught up again yet (on page 7), but has anyone started working out a timeline from the last time SM was seen in public until the police were called?

I have a lot of questions about the camping trip as it pertains to when BM knew the camping trip was to occur and why the trip was a day late in coming back and when BM knew that, being the biggest two. Did BM plan to kill SM while the daughters were out of state so the girls would be the ones to report their mother missing or to keep them from interfering in some way?

 

[Boxer]

Here, in the US, it’s the receipts from Walmart that trip people up. I’m sure LE has examined receipts and security footage from the Walmart in Salida and the one near the HIE in Broomfield.
Maybe BM couldn’t get bleach at the local Walmart because of the shortage due to COVID-19. Maybe that’s why he paid a visit to Salida Stove and Spa Saturday afternoon according to JP. MG said he was shopping alone all over Salida that afternoon. Wonder if he purchased any Mother’s Day gifts during this shopping spree? MOO

Interesting, bleach was gone from shelves almost first.

 

[Chocoholic]

I have been thinking about a motive. Financial comes to mind. Also I recall that early on when AM flew to CO a couple of days after SM went missing, he said that he was talking with BM and that BM mentioned that he could not bare the thought of Suzanne being abducted, because that would mean some one has her. There may have been a person who was very special to SM. (This is no way implies SM was having an affair). BM may have felt threatened by this friendship and decided that if he could not have her, no one else could.

Great thought! It made me think….. maybe he couldn’t bear the thought of her with someone else after a divorce. The old, “if I can’t have you, no one will”.

 

[Seattle1]

Haven't caught up again yet (on page 7), but has anyone started working out a timeline from the last time SM was seen in public until the police were called?

I have a lot of questions about the camping trip as it pertains to when BM knew the camping trip was to occur and why the trip was a day late in coming back and when BM knew that, being the biggest two. Did BM plan to kill SM while the daughters were out of state so the girls would be the ones to report their mother missing or to keep them from interfering in some way?

LE has never confirmed SM's last public sighting -- other than to say that it was later than first believed. Personally, I think many questions and details about the camping trip are answered and shared in the AA, and why the daughters and their privacy, are specifically referenced in the Order delaying public access. MOO