Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #64 *ARREST*

[marylamby]

That's a lot of ifs of which zero are proven. IMO

That's where the "If" comes in. None of us have the facts, yet.

 

[seekingjustice**]

I see I'm not alone in my suspicion that it was BM who was spying on SM vs. the other way around.

Looks like Ellen Killoran from Crime Online is wondering the exact same thing.

JMO.

I'm also suspicious that it was BM doing the spying as it fits perfectly into the type of behaviours we see from abusive partners.

As to the question of why wouldn't he get rid of it.... well we don't know how long ago the recording was taken, so it could easily have been overlooked and completely forgotten about in the rush to clean up the crime scene, stage the crime, get rid of the body and create the alibi.

BM could have suspected/sensed that SM was getting close to someone and sharing personal information with them which I imagine would be extremely threatening to someone like BM who needs to be in control and had gone out of his way to isolate her from family and cut off her support network. The spy pen could have been just one of many in his arsenal of tools in order to control SM.

I'm curious to find out how LE found the spy pen, was it just a lucky find during their search or were they tipped off by someone.

 

[TKG]

I think there is a good chance that we need to prepare for the fact that there could be no certain information that Suzanne is deceased. But that there is a whole lot of circumstantial evidence - when taken in sequence - that says that this is the case.

Possibly no large pools of luminoled blood, no large pools of blood on the underside of a carpet, no smoking gun, no gun residue on hands ....

The defense could be indicating that this is one area that they are going to use to try to create reasonable doubt.

"Because no-one has heard from Suzanne in over a year doesn't mean she is dead."
"Because our client used great amounts of chlorine to clean himself doesn't mean she is dead."
"Because bleach was smelled in the hotel room (and in the house?) doesn't mean she is dead."
Etc, etc, etc .....

Not saying that this is right, but they will use any tactic that they can think of to try to create reasonable doubt.
The best thing possible, at the moment, would be for Suzanne's remains to be discovered. Then that argument would be cancelled out.

Hopefully we just have a "smoking pen".

 

[Seattle1]

Yellow! What’s the question?

Howdy! I believe OP was questioning whether or not a poor audio quality spy pen recording, enhanced by FBI for clarity, would be admissible as evidence in a criminal trial.

What you missed was some discussion about Thursday's motion hearing where the defense mostly aired their complaints about discovery from the DA's office, the quality of the discovery, and tardiness. Typical stuff one would expect from BM's team. And suggested sanctions included bail release before the PEPG hearing and/or reduction of charges from 1st to 2nd-degree murder!

 

[GordianKnot]

What did I miss? What’s up with the pen and with theApril 5 sit down?

Hi, gitana!

Turns out, one of the pieces of evidence is a spy pen.

The pen recorded Suzanne in conversation on the phone with "someone," along w/ recordings of three messages. The person who was recorded is apparently a "crucial witness" in the case. It's unclear whether Suzanne was recorded wittingly or unwittingly, i.e. whether she intended to record herself or Barry surreptitiously recorded her.

Also, apparently, Barry (being the valedictorian that he is) did a sit-down interview with the FBI on April 5, at which time the FBI laid out 26 pieces of evidence in front of him. Apparently, the defense attorney wants to know exactly which pieces of evidence were shown to him, although I'm not sure the prosecution is required to identify specific items shown to the defendant prior to him retaining a lawyer.

I would think that as long as all evidence is turned over to the defense during discovery, they would be satisfying their obligations, and LE would not have to specifically identify for the defense which 26 items were shown to BM at that interview.

But IANAL, whereas you are…what do you think?

JMO.

 

[Angleterre]

Though I wonder why it would be used as prosecutorial evidence if it was critical to the defense case.

I would have thought that the prosecution would just not present it as evidence, and let the defense find out about it for themselves.
As in, "Look, it says here that the police confiscated a spy pen - but there is no detail here about it. Let's ask for this spy pen and see what, if anything, has been recorded on it."

I don't know what the prosecution has to hand over in CO. Every little thing, or only items that will be used as their own evidence?
.

I know U.K. and USA law is different and presented differently too but in the U.K. this is part of the rules of disclosure and had it not been put on the disclosure schedule to the defence, then that action once found out about, would be enough to have a mistrial in the U.K. with the case thrown out on prosecution procedural issues

 

[gitana1]

Howdy! I believe OP was questioning whether or not a poor audio quality spy pen recording, enhanced by FBI for clarity, would be admissible as evidence in a criminal trial.

What you missed was some discussion about Thursday's motion hearing where the defense mostly aired their complaints about discovery from the DA's office, the quality of the discovery, and tardiness. Typical stuff one would expect from BM's team. And suggested sanctions included bail release before the PEPG hearing and/or reduction of charges from 1st to 2nd-degree murder!

Ah! Well it depends how clear the recording is. I remember in the Sabrina Aisenberg case LE used a hidden recording of the parents to charge them with making false statements. But the judge ruled the recordings were inaudible and out of context and this were inadmissible. Not enough evidence to sustain a trial.

 

[al66pine]

Foot in Mouth?

.... So, summarizing EI's list of grievances, here's her litany of complaints so far:...She can't figure out how to open files, and the mean DA man won't walk her through it for the 13th time....

@GordianKnot bbm sbm Thanks for your post, reminding me of def atty's previous comment. Am I confusing this w another case, in which def atty put foot in mouth?

Something like (my paraphrasing) ---
Def Atty to judge: If you don't have a device (technology/software?) to open and read the file we submitted (watch the vid?), we'll lend you a laptop (hard-drive?), so you can.
Judge: We may be a small town/rural area, unlike Denver, but we do have computers here.

If ^ was same atty & judge, and def atty now contends she cannot open files the prosecutor provided the defense, seems ironic? Well, does to me. my2ct.

If I'm thinking of wrong case, sorry, pls ignore and scroll down.

 

[rainbowshummingbird]

Just to be crystal clear, all talk of DV is complete speculation across the board, right? It pops up all the time but I think people have told themselves a story here because its been a year and we still have basically no actual evidence.

If one considers that killing one’s spouse falls within the designation of domestic violence, then it is likely that Barry is guilty of domestic violence.

 

[susiQ]

Will dumbbells be included?

Unnecessary. The dumbbell is already in the cell!! But you knew that!

 

[Cindizzi]

Just to be crystal clear, all talk of DV is complete speculation across the board, right? It pops up all the time but I think people have told themselves a story here because its been a year and we still have basically no actual evidence.

Well, the words Domestic Violence are at the top of the charging document Page 1.
https://www.courts.state.co.us/user...8/21CR78 Morphew Amended Complaint 051821.pdf

IANAL, but I believe it’s on there because it’s a sentence enhancement.
The very act of Murder is DV . IMO

You are correct that we have seen no evidence of DV in MSM or from LE, but we the public, and the Press have not seen the AA yet.

SM’s family members have alluded to having found out that SM was involved somehow with DV groups.
JMO DV does not only include physical abuse but also mental, verbal, psychological control/abuse. IMHO

 

[genuineusa77]

Well, the words Domestic Violence are at the top of the charging document Page 1.
https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/11th_Judicial_District/Chaffee/cases of interest/21CR78/21CR78 Morphew Amended Complaint 051821.pdf

IANAL, but I believe it’s on there because it’s a sentence enhancement.
The very act of Murder is DV . IMO

You are correct that we have seen no evidence of DV in MSM or from LE, but we the public, and the Press have not seen the AA yet.

SM’s family members have alluded to having found out that SM was involved somehow with DV groups.
JMO DV does not only include physical abuse but also mental, verbal, psychological control/abuse. IMHO

Suzanne was helping to counsel at DV groups, not there as a victim of abuse. Am I not right?

 

[genuineusa77]

Yes. It is pure speculation. Which is all we have at the moment.

I personally think that we have been told that 'Suzanne was scared' and that was likely because of the age-old reason that she wanted to leave a said-to-be controlling husband.

I also personally think that said-to-be controlling husband was not going to split the family assets, so Suzanne was not allowed to leave ... alive.

But that is pure speculation, based on historical cases.

BBM: I took it as being scared of their finances. When we were in financial distress, I was scared too!

 

[genuineusa77]

What is a "spy pen" !?

 

[Cindizzi]

Suzanne was helping to counsel at DV groups, not there as a victim of abuse. Am I not right?

I’m not sure any of us know enough to determine that.

<modsnip>

 

[RumorMonger]

JMO DV does not only include physical abuse but also mental, verbal, psychological control/abuse. IMHO

SBM
Let's just go with that. Still, zero evidence.

 

[Angleterre]

According to the article written by Lauren, the FBI presented Barry with 26 exhibits in April. April was when he admitted to felony forgery regarding the presidential ballot. Do you think that the 26 exhibits were regarding Suzanne’s murder, when they interviewed him in Franz Lake? 26 exhibits couldn’t just be about voting, right? It must have been some interview. It feels like 26 is a lot to show him. They really showed him the 26 things? I am curious what a professional would say, if it’s common to disclose that much to a suspect during an interview.

Yes from my perspective it is
The last thing that I would want is for the case to be thrown out because there are items that the prosecution will rely on in the case that need to be disclosed because if they aren’t Then there’s retribution to be had by the defence - why give them that opportunity
Batton down the hatches and let nothing through that can give the defence a legal comeback. It’s not worth the risk to the trial . Just disclose everything and you can then decide as the trial progresses, what to use and what has value added to your case and the defence can do the same

 

[Knox]

That's a lot of ifs of which zero are proven. IMO

The text Suzanne sent her sister Malinda, two days before she was reported missing, will in her own words- tell the story.

 

[justtrish]

Yes from my perspective it is
The last thing that I would want is for the case to be thrown out because there are items that the prosecution will rely on in the case that need to be disclosed because if they aren’t Then there’s retribution to be had by the defence - why give them that opportunity
Batton down the hatches and let nothing through that can give the defence a legal comeback. It’s not worth the risk to the trial . Just disclose everything and you can then decide as the trial progresses, what to use and what has value added to your case and the defence can do the same

In this case, I don't think 26 is a lot! They have hundreds I'm sure because the AA is extremely long. Each exhibit could be something as simple as a single text message or a statement made by a person, something simple as his own statements early on not matching something he did or said later. I don't think they would have shown him anything extremely critical, I feel it was likely little inconsistencies or little lies he told in an attempt to get him rattled and mess up further with what he said.

 

[genuineusa77]

I’m not sure any of us know enough to determine that.

<modsnip>

I should have said, I thought she was a volunteer,