Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #18

[Cassady]

I use those terms because this is WS, where those terms are used (LE means a collection and collaboration of entities and surely CCSO, CSI and FBI are all in that group). It's shorthand.

I don't think a debate over the meaning of the term or the history of "police" is going to change usage here, it was well established for years before you or I ever showed up here.

At any rate, you missed my point. There have been a lot of people (who come from divisions with the word "investigations" in their title), not just one or two. If I were the prosecution and I had to address this issue in court, I would start with local LE (and I think someone higher than "lead investigator" is more likely to be able to speak to the overall logistics from the 911 call onward), then do FBI, then CSI. ''

I do have a question for you, as a defense attorney (bear with me, I'm sure this could be said easier by an attorney).

If the defense should try to bring up this point (that LE narrowed too soon on one person and didn't attempt to investigate other leads), how would they introduce it? Who would they call to the stand? Those persons have to be added to the list of witnesses - can they be added during the trial?

In that case, what happens? (Besides X-examination). The prosecution can then bring its own witnesses on this point, right? The defense won't know what those witnesses are about to say, but can X-examine? And then prosecution can Re-X, right?

(I know that's a lot of questions - any help here would be appreciated). That's how it would work here in a California. My main question is whether you think a judge would permit a defense to bring in such witnesses after the trial started, and in any case, how would the defense establish that point?

It really depends on the facts of the case. Having handled thousands of cases, each case has it's own nuances and story...IMO

 

[10ofRods]

It really depends on the facts of the case. Having handled thousands of cases, each case has it's own nuances and story...IMO

I'm sure each has its own nuances. So you're saying it's completely up in the air and lawyers can bring in witnesses at any time, depending on the Judge, right?

And that what happens after that is totally up to that same Judge, no patterns discernible across the US or within a State.

1000's of cases is a lot to handle. I've observed (as a consultant and as a researcher) 100's of cases. And of course, read legal briefs and transcripts on 1000's.

I'm more familiar with California, Colorado, Texas and New Mexico, which is why I was asking.

How would a lawyer show that the "facts of the case" included "LE having too narrow a focus"? Has this ever happened within your experience? Have the facts of the case ever led to questioning of investigators about too narrow a focus? What percentage would you say that is?

 

[Itsapuzzle]

I wondered if anyone was going to mention the difference between a Baptist church service and a Roman Catholic mass.
Not at all the same thing.
I can't really put my finger on why, but I've never really had the impression that BM was much of a literal churchman, with weekly attendance, and/or involved in any church ministries or groups.
On the flip side, I did get that impression of SM.

jmo

Thanks Ontario Mom and everyone who's pointed out that mass is not the term used for Baptists. I had absolutely no idea .... forgive my ignorance, I meant Worship then. Had a look on their Facebook and yes, they say "Join us for Worship on Sunday", no worries, mass was the totally wrong word. I've had a look at the Trinity page and have seen quite a few photos BM, even seems to have been in the church baseball team, but maybe he just took part in all the fun stuff, not sure. I was having a look at some of the Sunday Worship's and did see what could be the back of SM and BM together, but that's pure speculation by me, not possible to confirm, just MOO.

 

[branmuffin]

Hi Branmuffin, I think you misread the article. Yes, the AirPods pair with all of those Apple devices but they do not update “your iPad, iMac, Apple Watch, etc.”. For that, you would need to update the operating system either manually through the device (iPad, iMac or MacBook) by automatic software update or through iTunes, Finder or Apple Configurator.

One interesting thing, if this were an abduction case: EarPods are a Bluetooth device and Bluetooth devices are trackable by anyone within a close range. SM could have named her EarPods after her. Something an abductor can use to their advantage.

Here’s a very interesting article on how it works:

How Bluetooth Surveillance Works

Well, I DID acknowledge I was a Neanderthal! I thought what you mentioned was what the article meant when they said 'the pairing process'. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Cassady]

I'm sure each has its own nuances. So you're saying it's completely up in the air and lawyers can bring in witnesses at any time, depending on the Judge, right?

And that what happens after that is totally up to that same Judge, no patterns discernible across the US or within a State.

1000's of cases is a lot to handle. I've observed (as a consultant and as a researcher) 100's of cases. And of course, read legal briefs and transcripts on 1000's.

I'm more familiar with California, Colorado, Texas and New Mexico, which is why I was asking.

How would a lawyer show that the "facts of the case" included "LE having too narrow a focus"? Has this ever happened within your experience? Have the facts of the case ever led to questioning of investigators about too narrow a focus? What percentage would you say that is?

The "too narrow focus" defense would only be logical in a very limited number of criminal cases. It would also have to be used in conjunction with other flaws in the government's case to be effective...IMO.

In those cases that it might apply, most of the defense arguement could be established C-Xing the government's witnesses. In some cases an "expert" (ex-LE) could be called by the defense to establish what they think should have been done. The defense would have to notify government that they were calling an expert and provide a report from that expert prior to trial. The defense would also list this person on their witness list, that they also must disclose prior to trial.

How all that is developed depends on the facts of the case....IMO

 

[lamlawindy]

I use those terms because this is WS, where those terms are used (LE means a collection and collaboration of entities and surely CCSO, CSI and FBI are all in that group). It's shorthand.

I don't think a debate over the meaning of the term or the history of "police" is going to change usage here, it was well established for years before you or I ever showed up here.

At any rate, you missed my point. There have been a lot of people (who come from divisions with the word "investigations" in their title), not just one or two. If I were the prosecution and I had to address this issue in court, I would start with local LE (and I think someone higher than "lead investigator" is more likely to be able to speak to the overall logistics from the 911 call onward), then do FBI, then CSI. ''

I do have a question for you, as a defense attorney (bear with me, I'm sure this could be said easier by an attorney).

If the defense should try to bring up this point (that LE narrowed too soon on one person and didn't attempt to investigate other leads), how would they introduce it? Who would they call to the stand? Those persons have to be added to the list of witnesses - can they be added during the trial?

In that case, what happens? (Besides X-examination). The prosecution can then bring its own witnesses on this point, right? The defense won't know what those witnesses are about to say, but can X-examine? And then prosecution can Re-X, right?

(I know that's a lot of questions - any help here would be appreciated). That's how it would work here in a California. My main question is whether you think a judge would permit a defense to bring in such witnesses after the trial started, and in any case, how would the defense establish that point?

Well, the defense needn't call any witnesses to introduce the "narrowed-too-soon" theory, assuming he was charged.

The state's police witnesses will likely mention Barry Morphew (he's the person I mentioned with respect to this whole theory on prior posts) quite soon after being sworn. Second, cross-exam is the perfect place to bring up facts:

1. If cellphone records were obtained, who's records did you subpoena?

2. Which registered sex offenders in Chaffee County did you interrogate? Did you verify their alibis? How?

3. How many men did you interview? How many women?

The goal is not to prove that the police actually had a one-track mind; teasing out that possibility is only a means to an end. The goal is to create doubt in the minds of the jury as to whether the investigators did a good job, and a "one-track mind" theory is only one way to do that. Remember, we defense attorneys, for the most part, don't have many innocent clients: we have not guilty clients.

 

[lamlawindy]

The "too narrow focus" defense would only be logical in a very limited number of criminal cases. It would also have to be used in conjunction with other flaws in the government's case to be effective...IMO.

In those cases that it might apply, most of the defense arguement could be established C-Xing the government's witnesses. In some cases an "expert" (ex-LE) could be called by the defense to establish what they think should have been done. The defense would have to notify government that they were calling an expert and provide a report from that expert prior to trial. The defense would also list this person on their witness list, that they also must disclose prior to trial.

How all that is developed depends on the facts of the case....IMO

Quite right. In most jurisdictions, an expert witness would have to be disclosed & the state given the opportunity to depose him/her prior to trial.

 

[Ontario Mom]

How would you know a WS sleuther is posting on FB under a different name? Cut and paste is alive and well.

Folks tend to have distinct writing styles, and tend to use the same words again & again.
Sure, folks can copy/paste all day long but when you see someone on another platform saying the exact same thing (in posts & comments & responses), and in the exact same way that a member here is saying, it's really hard to miss.
I've been here a long time and I've seen it time and time again.
I usually don't even mention it, unless it's someone causing trouble.
Thankfully, that doesn't happen very often.


jmo

 

[branmuffin]

Folks tend to have distinct writing styles, and tend to use the same words again & again.
Sure, folks can copy/paste all day long but when you see someone on another platform saying the exact same thing (in posts & comments & responses), and in the exact same way that a member here is saying, it's really. hard to miss.
I've been here a long time and I've seen it time and time again.
I usually don't even mention it, unless it's someone causing trouble.
Thankfully, that doesn't happen very often.


jmo

Hmmm, you've got me curious now. What FB sites would they be? I've only checked out a couple to find out they were private so didn't bother. The public one has comments five weeks old. I have a FB account with my proper name but rarely go on it.

 

[GordianKnot]

I respect your opinion as it pertains to this situation, at the same time I respectfully have to say that your general statement is incorrect. Sadly, Mothers quite simply do do that, as do fathers, siblings and children. Tragically, it happens all the time.

BBM:

Right, but in this case, which is what we're discussing, the circumstances don't support a suicide scenario at all.

If you want to entertain the possibility that SM killed herself so that her daughters could collect insurance money, then you have to buy into the fantastical notion that SM herself staged her disappearance.

You have to believe that SM herself planted her bike and other items to make it appear as if she'd had an accident/been abducted/been attacked by a mountain lion during a bike ride.

Sorry, I ain't drinking that Kool-Aid. Hard pass.

Find a single case example in all of recorded history where someone staged their own abduction and then killed themselves so that their kids could claim insurance money, and I'll entertain that as a remote possibility.

If SM wanted her daughters to score an insurance windfall so much that she would literally kill herself to make it happen, then she surely would have ensured that she killed herself in such a way that her body would be found, so that the insurance company would pay out.

If SM wanted to cave in and let her daughters collect insurance money (which is an incredibly jaded and cynical view, frankly), she wouldn't have fought the cancer.

And fought it not just once, but twice.

This woman wanted to LIVE.

Someone else had other plans.

JMO.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Thanks Ontario Mom and everyone who's pointed out that mass is not the term used for Baptists. I had absolutely no idea .... forgive my ignorance, I meant Worship then. Had a look on their Facebook and yes, they say "Join us for Worship on Sunday", no worries, mass was the totally wrong word. I've had a look at the Trinity page and have seen quite a few photos BM, even seems to have been in the church baseball team, but maybe he just took part in all the fun stuff, not sure. I was having a look at some of the Sunday Worship's and did see what could be the back of SM and BM together, but that's pure speculation by me, not possible to confirm, just MOO.

No worries at all, not everyone knows it's not the same thing.
I think we all knew what you meant, but someone could get easily confused if they saw "mass" when the Morphews are not Roman Catholic.
Just hoping to avoid seeing a new rumor get started.

I haven't looked at their previous church page, so I wasn't aware that BM was in several pics, and even on the baseball team.
If he was that active in the regular events at the church then that does change my mind a little bit.
Not about his guilt/innocence, but about his concern for keeping up appearances & attending regularly with his wife/family.

jmo

 

[Ontario Mom]

Hmmm, you've got me curious now. What FB sites would they be? I've only checked out a couple to find out they were private so didn't bother. The public one has comments five weeks old. I have a FB account with my proper name but rarely go on it.

In a general sense, this is common on the "find" pages that are public, but to be honest, it's far more common on the discussion group pages that you usually have to join. Like someone mentioned earlier in the thread, it's not like it's illegal or anything, and I just usually find it interesting to see the same folks on a thread I follow here, on various pages on FB.
I've yet to see anyone respond to a particularly strong point in a post over there, and just say "BAM!" but if I do... I'll know who it is.

 

[GordianKnot]

I haven't looked at their previous church page, so I wasn't aware that BM was in several pics, and even on the baseball team.
If he was that active in the regular events at the church then that does change my mind a little bit.
Not about his guilt/innocence, but about his concern for keeping up appearances & attending regularly with his wife/family.

jmo

RSABBM:

"Image is Everything."

I think keeping up appearances is priority #1 to this man.

It doesn't surprise me at all that he would want to be seen sitting in the pews on Sunday.

Of course, sitting in the stands doesn't make you a member of the team.

So there's that.

JMO.

 

[Minordetails]

BBM:

What I'm seeing and hearing from LE has me very, very impressed.
Which is to say, I love the fact that they're keeping virtually everything close to the vest.
I love their silence, because it's abundantly clear that BM hates it.
JMO.

I assume LE is doing a good job and knows exactly what they are doing, but really, I have no idea.
For me, an arrest and hopefully finding SM, will signify a job well done by LE.
Until one or both of those things happen, I’m not going to heap praise on LE or criticize them.
Also, I’m not sure that it’s “abundantly clear that BM hates” LE’s silence. One might assume that to be true. As an innocent or guilty husband, BM would have reason to be upset with LE’s cone of silence.
MOO

 

[Ontario Mom]

RSABBM:

"Image is Everything."

I think keeping up appearances is priority #1 to this man.

It doesn't surprise me at all that he would want to be seen sitting in the pews on Sunday.

Of course, sitting in the stands doesn't make you a member of the team.

So there's that.

JMO.

Whenever I follow a case where there are churchgoers in the immediate circle of people closest to the victim, I always think of Dennis Rader.
He was president of his church's council.
Being a good Lutheran didn't stop him from being the BTK killer.

 

[FelicityLemon]

I think it's two LE and they're just chatting.
You can see that there's somebody in the driver's seat of the truck and there's probably someone in the driver's seat of the car because there's no room for either driver to get out on the driver's side. Cop cars often position their cars this way so they can chat without having to leave the car and be ready to peel out on a call.

 

[JnRyan]

I wish we had a verified insider here, even if just a Salida resident. There is not much being put out there now. The sheriff last had a press release almost a month ago. There isn't much from the family either. I looked at the 'Find Suzanne Morphew' FB page and there isn't much, if anything since May and I believe the nephew, Trevor Noel, is the admin for the group.

 

[dkryder]

It's been my general observation that people who have homes like this on properties like this usually have very good security camera setups. I can't remember reading about any camera setup on this property but I missed a lot of the early discussion. Is the possibility of video just something that LE and the family are not talking about or did this place just lack security cameras? Thanks.

 

[FelicityLemon]

You may be correct about Colorado requiring notice of an alternate perpetrator. Here in Indiana, the defense is allowed greater latitude & need not inform the State of most theories prior to trial: alibi is the notable exception. Of course, informally most of us defense attorneys will let the prosecutor know in a general sense what elements of a crime will be at issue at trial.

Re: my use of the term investigators: I try to not use the terms "law enforcement" or LE. Those terms are relatively novel & reflect a belief that police agencies exist to enforce laws. The problem with that is that traditionally the role for police has been to preserve order during peacetime, hence the term "peace officer." This necessarily may include not enforcing certain laws at certain given times, which is why police officers have quite a bit of discretion.

Most police agencies that I've dealt with have a "road" division and an "investigations" division. I just use the term "investigators" as a general catch-all for officers who are assigned to the latter.

Thank you, it's good to know because it's a subject that's been on my mind for several years. I understand what you say when using LE vs investigators. It's awkward trying to know what to use as a catch-all term of respect for everyone involved in a case. We want to credit every one of those doing their best to help people. . I have always used LE as that catch-all. I hope they all understood what we mean when using LE to encompass everyone even though it's not accurate. Awkward.

I tend to have simple thoughts of Good Guys and Bad Guys.

 

[Hatfield]

I wish we had a verified insider here, even if just a Salida resident. There is not much being put out there now. The sheriff last had a press release almost a month ago. There isn't much from the family either. I looked at the 'Find Suzanne Morphew' FB page and there isn't much, if anything since May and I believe the nephew, Trevor Noel, is the admin for the group.

We do have a WS'er from this thread moving to the Salida area in a Motor Home in about a month. It was talked about quite a few pages back.

Maybe they will be able to get the local scoop for us. And if we are lucky we will get up to date pictures of the area.