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

[LietKynes]

Something about him leaving the tools on a hotel cart accessible to anyone (I assume) has been bothering me. Those tools have monetary value. Was he hoping they would be stolen and hard or impossible to retrieve?

bbm
Hmmm...
Good point !!

 

[Whiteorchids]

Special treatment is bias. <modsnip>
Also,
unfortunately if there are reluctant witnesses, all this time allows for mischief among witnesses aligning their testimony (possibly coordinated by the defense lawyer.)

They even released Letecia Stauch AA she has a bio daughter herself and a step daughter it was not pleasant to read but was still released <modsnip>

 

[LietKynes]

I think this is super important here. BM has created a dysfunctional...mess...that now extends far beyond the boundaries of his family (he loves invading boundaries, it's in his nature - whether by nurture or genetics). The person closest to him, who knew the most about containing him and comforting him, has been destroyed. No one in his immediate family system could believe that, at first. There are some who still don't.

The Court has decided to go gentle on those next victims. The more I think about it, the more I'm okay with it.

The outcome is the same (hearings in August). The Court arrested Barry and put him in jail and has not entertained, yet, any motions for bail (which would likely go to appeal at this point). So while Barry's attorneys got a "win" here, Barry himself gets to chill until August 9-24, which is probably not what he thinks he hired them for.

The Court thinks the AA contains information that would disturbing to some of the victims and to the potential jurors.

bbm
Lol !
Maybe by Aug. Barry will have hired (what he deems) more "competent" attorneys ?
Or act as his own counsel ?
Double LOL !

 

[LietKynes]

They even released Letecia Stauch AA she has a bio daughter herself and a step daughter it was not pleasant to read but was still released <modsnip>

Maybe Barry's lawyers are using this as an excuse to delay the AA and get their ducks in a row ?
Just saying.

 

[al66pine]

When does Jeopardy Attach?

....For lawyers, a question - when does the right to avoid double jeopardy apply? If the DA withdrew the case to investigate further, could she re-file it next year? Or, does she have to follow through now, and take whatever the outcome may be?...

@CGray123 sbm Below, some info* from Cornell Law Review and other sources about the Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment.
When does jeopardy attach? "... In jury trials, jeopardy attaches at the empaneling of the jury. In a bench trial, jeopardy attaches at the swearing in of the first witness...."

Hoping our verified atty's or legal professionals will weigh in, re possible refiling question, but atm, seems premature to think about jeopardy attaching to this case. my2ct.
__________________________________________
* "....procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges following an acquittal in the same jurisdiction."
^ Double jeopardy - Wikipedia
" The Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits anyone from being prosecuted twice for substantially the same crime." From Legal Information Institute
^ Double Jeopardy
"...constitutional double jeopardy protections have been applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment since 1969. 10"
^"Double Jeopardy, Acquittal Appeals, and the Law-Fact Distinction" Cornell Law Review
^ Available at: Double Jeopardy, Acquittal Appeals, and the Law-Fact Distinction (page 3, fn 3)
Also https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1894&context=fss_paper
And: Amendment V. RIGHTS OF PERSONS

 

[Boxer]

They even released Letecia Stauch AA she has a bio daughter herself and a step daughter it was not pleasant to read but was still released <modsnip>

Yes. Why?

 

[Whiteorchids]

<modsnip> I just reread the order. The judge goes to pains to make the AA sound extremely prejudicial and causing great potential harm to the "victims" - whom we assume to mean not only SM but also the daughters - as well as to witnesses. He also believes the law leans to the side of the defense because of the contents of the AA being in large part not evidentiary to the crime accused (if I am interpreting correctly). As another sleuther pointed out - waiting or never releasing the AA gives the defense more advantages in terms of prepping their witnesses, etc. So the judge and defense are in agreement (rolling eyes!). I hope the Media continues to pursue release of the AA. I think the judge is erring too far on the side of the defense. BM deserves a fair trial but if the AA is that prejudicial, God help the defense when photos of the evidence against BM are played on a big screen for all the world to see.

I guess I shouldn’t be shocked if the judge grants him bail <modsnip>

 

[NWLady]

I wonder what legal jeopardy, if any, the AA places the daughters in. The judge has weighed the public interest against their's and heavily leaned in their direction. He states that one daughter still lives in Salida. The length of the AA may be outside this judge's experience but unless it's a random fishing expedition or he questions the judgment of the court that authorized it, his criticism on that point seems odd to me.
EBM

And yeah, worrying about their protection but volunteering/releasing where one still resides? But I suppose that was necessary to make his point? I don't know? IMO, it appeared somewhat contradictory to the point he was trying to make. JMO

 

[Cindizzi]

I thought in his first interview with LS, JP said that BM mentioned the job to him on Saturday afternoon. When BM called MG early Sunday, he told her to get a crew together and to call JP. I thought JP did call BM Sunday morning to confirm after MG called him. MG said she was surprised that BM was asking for extra help. She said it was supposed to be just her and him and that they had postponed the job several times.
I wonder if BM thought it would look bad if his alibi consisted of just him and MG at a hotel on Sunday night.

Well I found another video of LS reporting with snippets of JP in it, mostly about the hotel room. Maybe we are mis-remembering that JP talked to BM about the job on Saturday? Maybe it was just that he “saw” him.
Remember how the Daily Mail reported “ BM ordered JP to Broomfield on Sunday” ? Lol More confused than ever now. Might have to look with fresh eyes in the morning. Good to see you, OC !

 

[Chocoholic]

Did I mis-hear, or did he say he already had a job, and BM knew that, but he asked him anyway to head to Denver so he had to figure out a way to help him out? He did say that, right?

I'm sure that's what I heard but now I can't find the time stamp. Grr.

ETA: I found it and yep, that's what he said:

29:16 LS asks "so then on Sunday what time did you arrive at the hotel?"
JP responds and says he didn't get there until Sunday night, but then digresses and says that BM asked MG, to ask him to go down there and work, and then says that he was working for Jeff, and say he wonders why he'd ask him that since he already has a job.

I never really gave much credence to the idea that BM wanted JP there at the hotel, because they look alike at a distance, but now... I mean, maybe some of y'all were on to something?

Why did he specifically want JP there, when he knew JP already had a job?

Also interesting is that we were previously told that BM asked JP himself, on Saturday afternoon, to come work for him on the Broomfield job. But that's not what JP says in this interview. He did see him that afternoon, at the shop JP currently works at, but he said BM asked MG, to ask him to join the crew.

Anyway I think that's what I'm hearing him say. His accent is top shelf!

Hopelessly behind, but so glad you cleared up the part about BM telling MG to get JP on the Broomfield job. I remember reading that early on and then I was confused because everyone seemed to believe that Barry asked him when he ran into him. You’ve finally validated my thoughts all along, I just couldn’t find anything to back it up.

 

[katydid23]

If anyone has bobcat knowledge, what’s a plate? Also, on the wall-would a bobcat be required to do the work? Would the inspector have to be scheduled ahead of time to review the wall work? Did an inspector show up at all?

 

[DeDee]

I took the part about witness credibility at a premium to mean the judge doesn't want BM to know who has said what because it may endanger the witness, the trial, or he'll be writing notes on paper towels like Frazee did.

I agree. Redacting names and content from this very lengthy AA would be a cumbersome task. Heresy could mean entire paragraphs are redacted from view.

I watched testimony today where the Judge wouldn't allow the sneaky defense to put forward information that two tips were not thoroughly followed up on by LE by citing the desicion to omit had been made in a pretrial hearing.

When the jury returned, the Judge told them questions asked by either side are not to be considered as evidence. Then, he repeated the faulty question asked by the defense and instructed them to disregard it. It's a no body case of a toddler.

This Judge earlier warned Barry to be civil if his daughters' visited and now seeing them mentioned as possible reasons against the AA being released, I wonder if the daughter(s) statement(s) are indeed being protected by this ruling.

 

[katydid23]

Yes, what the hedouble hockey sticks are the Salida brochures about? And a real estate brochure? What wasBM thinking he needed to prove? It’s easy enough to prove if BM rented the room and was in the room. CCTV & Finger prints would suffice. I’m totally confused and scratching my head!

EBM to delete double post

It might not have been part of a plan or a. strategy...

My husband has a habit of grabbing the mail when he walks past the box, as he goes to his car. And he takes it with him and looks through it at the stop lights or when he arrives at destination etc....Which drives me nutty because I find bills and notices in his car weeks later...

So MAYBE, he just grabbed the mail, looked at it when he got into the room, and tossed the junk mail? No real plan involved?

 

[al66pine]

Were BM's Tools "Accessible"?

Something about him leaving the tools on a hotel cart accessible to anyone (I assume) has been bothering me. Those tools have monetary value. Was he hoping they would be stolen and hard or impossible to retrieve?

@IRBHTX Thanks for your post. good point. In reading & watching interviews about BM leaving tools on HIE luggage cart, I got the impression he left tools on cart in his room, not avail to random ppl passing by. Without sifting thru many of stories & vids, I'm not sure, so could be entirely mistaken.

But he might very well have left tools on cart in hall, lobby, even parking lot. IDK.

 

[MsBetsy]

It might not have been part of a plan or a. strategy...

My husband has a habit of grabbing the mail when he walks past the box, as he goes to his car. And he takes it with him and looks through it at the stop lights or when he arrives at destination etc....Which drives me nutty because I find bills and notices in his car weeks later...

So MAYBE, he just grabbed the mail, looked at it when he got into the room, and tossed the junk mail? No real plan involved?

Yes, I think that's more likely rather than him leaving the mail as part of his alibi to prove he was there. He said he knew the hotel had cameras everywhere and there would be a record of his booking the room. Chlorine or mail as an alibi makes no sense. LE likely knows his whereabouts that day based on cellphone data and the GPS in his truck. I doubt they need the employee's testimony to prove where he was. They probably know how long he was at the work site as well. Imo

 

[Boxer]

I agree. Redacting names and content from this very lengthy AA would be a cumbersome task. Heresy could mean entire paragraphs are redacted from view.

I watched testimony today where the Judge wouldn't allow the sneaky defense to put forward information that two tips were not thoroughly followed up on by LE by citing the desicion to omit had been made in a pretrial hearing.

When the jury returned, the Judge told them questions asked by either side are not to be considered as evidence. Then, he repeated the faulty question asked by the defense and instructed them to disregard it. It's a no body case of a toddler.

This Judge earlier warned Barry to be civil if his daughters' visited and now seeing them mentioned as possible reasons against the AA being released, I wonder if the daughter(s) statement(s) are indeed being protected by this ruling.

Possibly BM has associates that wpukd harm potential witnesses?

 

[TKG]

They even released Letecia Stauch AA she has a bio daughter herself and a step daughter it was not pleasant to read but was still released <modsnip>

LS's daughter bought her supplies to clean up. She still (HH) has not spoken to the investigators. I have heard the prosecution will be calling her. I can't even imagine pretending your parent didn't commit an act that heinous. It is virtually impossible to believe she is innocent.

Psychologically it's fascinating. Tragic but fascinating. We see similar blind following with MM1 & MM2. I'm sure it is incredibly painful, unimaginable as the judge wrote, the pain they are in. <modsnip>

This lends itself to an earlier post about possibly being called for the prosecution without even knowing what they have to say is incriminating and not exculpatory.

As always, IMO MOO

 

[Seattle1]

Unless I’m misunderstanding, the JUDGE does not want the AA released, in addition to the defense. It also sounds like he might gut it. IMO

The State filed the AA on May 5, 2021, and requested the doc sealed pending BM's arrest.

At BM's first appearance (his Advisement), the State provided the AA to BM's defense on a thumb drive. The State also advised the court they were not opposed to unsealing the AA and releasing it to the public but would defer to the Court's decision.

Within days, the defense filed a motion requesting the AA remain sealed and in response, the Court gave both sides a date to present their reasoning for their position on the matter. After both sides responded, the Court stated either a hearing would be set or an Order filed.

Today, the Court filed an Order to keep the AA sealed with the Order expiring 7 days after the Preliminary Hearing, scheduled for Aug 24, 2021.

The Judge isn't going to gut the AA but provided the following reasons to keep the AA sealed until the expiration:

The length of the AA makes it a burden for the defense to redact prior to the defense beginning their investigation and could hamper BM's ability to effectively prepare his case.

Releasing the AA this early would not give the victims time to review or decide to review information about BM.

The Court can't meaningfully complete the redaction of the 130-page document without the input from both sides, and the AA is the record of ongoing LE investigation and Court can suppress the information from public view if done in public's interest.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/11th_Judicial_District/Chaffee/cases of interest/21CR78/21CR78 Order Limit Public Redacted.pdf

 

[Deleted member 222031]

The State filed the AA on May 5, 2021, and requested the doc sealed pending BM's arrest.

At BM's first appearance (his Advisement), the State provided the AA to BM's defense on a thumb drive. The State also advised the court they were not opposed to unsealing the AA and releasing it to the public but would defer to the Court's decision.

Within days, the defense filed a motion requesting the AA remain sealed and in response, the Court gave both sides a date to present their reasoning for their position on the matter. After both sides responded, the Court stated either a hearing would be set or an Order filed.

Today, the Court filed an Order to keep the AA sealed with the Order expiring 7 days after the Preliminary Hearing, scheduled for Aug 24, 2021.

The Judge isn't going to gut the AA but provided the following reasons to keep the AA sealed until the expiration:

The length of the AA makes it a burden for the defense to redact prior to the defense beginning their investigation and could hamper BM's ability to effectively prepare his case.

Releasing the AA this early would not give the victims time to review or decide to review information about BM.

The Court can't meaningfully complete the redaction of the 130-page document without the input from both sides, and the AA is the record of ongoing LE investigation and Court can suppress the information from public view if done in public's interest.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/11th_Judicial_District/Chaffee/cases of interest/21CR78/21CR78 Order Limit Public Redacted.pdf

Thank you for the timeline and succinct explanation of the order. I find the court's reasoning untenable. As if redacting is so onerous it jeopardizes ongoing discovery, etc.? Both the defense & prosecution should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. Also, how does this judge have the power to "gut" the AA? Would that not invalidate the arrest warrant or am I not getting what you mean by "gut"?

 

[SouthAussie]

I guess I shouldn’t be shocked if the judge grants him bail <modsnip>

We had a case here where a guy murdered his girlfriend by throwing her off their apartment's 15th floor balcony - in broad daylight, with an independent witness who saw him do it. He petitioned the Supreme Court and got bail (under exceptional circumstances clause) so he could "help with his case".

The very experienced Crown Prosecutor tried several times to get his bail revoked (even during the trial). All the court did was tighten his bail conditions.

Nothing is surprising any more.

Tighter bail for accused balcony killer