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

[Madeleine74]

For some reason WS is doubling my posts so I DBM

When you click to post your reply, only click once and no more than that. Assume your post went through and don't click a second time.

 

[kay74]

When you click to post your reply, only click once and no more than that. Assume your post went through and don't click a second time.

I did click once and there is a little thing on the upper right of the WS screen that keeps flashing, wierd. Is that causing it? I don't know.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Has anyone noticed this! There you have it.

I think you misread this.
What @gitana1 was saying was, that it was interesting they made a point to say they were clearing the property owner, but they did not say they were clearing the husband... as in, they didn't extend BM the same "cleared" status.

 

[lamlawindy]

I'm curious, in your experience, how often are investigators all looking in the same direction, and it turns out all of them were wrong?
Really curious how often that happens anymore, with so much digital evidence now.

That's a good question! It really depends on the type of case. For example, in domestic violence cases, I've found that detectives often are wrong because of preconceived notions that (a) men are not likely to be victims and (b) women are not likely to be aggressors (so a self-defense claim is often doubted).

By "often," I mean about 10% of the time or so. I recognize that this is a small portion of all cases, but that is cold comfort for my male clients accused of domestic offenses who genuinely were simply defending themselves from an attack or who never reported violence against them due to the attitude of police officers vis-a-vis male victims.

 

[susiQ]

Has anyone noticed this! There you have it.

Have what? They cleared the property owner and NOT BM. I think it was a typo by @gitana1. But I will defer back to her

 

[lamlawindy]

I’m not looking at convicting the guy. I’m just looking at what is overwhelmingly likely.

If you think a low risk victim was abducted from a low crime area, during a perfect time period, and law enforcement committed an epic screw up, fine.

Maybe it’s a coincidence that the husband didn’t give a flying ****.

Maybe the FBI and CBI suddenly forgot how to investigate cases.

Maybe not though.

What's the point of an investigation if it isn't to secure a conviction in a court of law? If prosecutors only prove that Barry Morphew was "overwhelmingly likely" the cause of harm to Suzanne (which is akin to a "clear and convincing evidence" standard), then he's "not guilty," since the criminal standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

I don't think Suzanne was abducted, harmed by wildlife, was hit by a car, etc. From my point of view -- a legal one, admittedly -- I want to see what actual evidence they have connecting Barry Morphew to Suzanne's disappearance. I also have no idea whether investigators screwed up: they have kept the details of the investigation to themselves (BTW, so have the Delphi murder investigators...and here we are 3 years since Abby & Libby were murdered).

I'm also at a loss at all the "reading" of Barry's demeanor. Very few people will have the experience of having their spouse go missing. Given this, why do we have a standard "expected" behavior for such a situation. In other words, whatever Barry's demeanor may be, I'm unsure it provides anything one way or the other.

 

[lamlawindy]

Don't worry, MassGuy. It’s defense posturing. 12 future jurors see it just like you do, through the eyes of a prosecutor.

Twelve future jurors seeing it that way won't make it to the jury because they'll be stricken for cause!

 

[TIGER0822]

Who mumbled it the sheriff? Why did he "mumble" it??

My apologies. Correcting my post.BM mumbled that he had been cleared by LE while he was being recorded by TD. I listened to the recording several times to try and figure out what BM was saying. BM did not sound confident saying that he was cleared.

 

[JnRyan]

What's the point of an investigation if it isn't to secure a conviction in a court of law? If prosecutors only prove that Barry Morphew was "overwhelmingly likely" the cause of harm to Suzanne (which is akin to a "clear and convincing evidence" standard), then he's "not guilty," since the criminal standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

I don't think Suzanne was abducted, harmed by wildlife, was hit by a car, etc. From my point of view -- a legal one, admittedly -- I want to see what actual evidence they have connecting Barry Morphew to Suzanne's disappearance. I also have no idea whether investigators screwed up: they have kept the details of the investigation to themselves (BTW, so have the Delphi murder investigators...and here we are 3 years since Abby & Libby were murdered).

I'm also at a loss at all the "reading" of Barry's demeanor. Very few people will have the experience of having their spouse go missing. Given this, why do we have a standard "expected" behavior for such a situation. In other words, whatever Barry's demeanor may be, I'm unsure it provides anything one way or the other.

I have no clue as to how to read BM's reaction or demeanor. If he did something to Suzanne, either planned or accidently, I can see his actions interpreted as one with something to hide. OTH, if he is innocent and something did happen to happen to Suzanne either at the house or while out riding, his reactions and feelings could be those of guilt. And not of guilt because of something he did, but rather in his mind he DIDN'T do. And that was to be at home with Suzanne on Mother's Day. If he really was out of town and someone else was responsible for Suzanne's disappearance he could be blaming himself on some level and thinking this would not have happened had he been there that day. I have no idea what my reaction would be if that were case. Anger? Remorse and withdrawal? Even if this guy is innocent there will be those who ask the question: Why were you not there on Mother's Day?

 

[10ofRods]

Twelve future jurors seeing it that way won't make it to the jury because they'll be stricken for cause!

Exactly what part?? I'm truly curious.

 

[10ofRods]

What's the point of an investigation if it isn't to secure a conviction in a court of law? If prosecutors only prove that Barry Morphew was "overwhelmingly likely" the cause of harm to Suzanne (which is akin to a "clear and convincing evidence" standard), then he's "not guilty," since the criminal standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

I don't think Suzanne was abducted, harmed by wildlife, was hit by a car, etc. From my point of view -- a legal one, admittedly -- I want to see what actual evidence they have connecting Barry Morphew to Suzanne's disappearance. I also have no idea whether investigators screwed up: they have kept the details of the investigation to themselves (BTW, so have the Delphi murder investigators...and here we are 3 years since Abby & Libby were murdered).

I'm also at a loss at all the "reading" of Barry's demeanor. Very few people will have the experience of having their spouse go missing. Given this, why do we have a standard "expected" behavior for such a situation. In other words, whatever Barry's demeanor may be, I'm unsure it provides anything one way or the other.

There's no standard. But I've done a lot of work in jails, prisons and mental hospitals and I have my views on how people look and behave in various situations. "We" are not one group here - some of us see BM's utterances one way and some see them another. I gave my first impressions ages ago, and have my opinions (which I generally keep to myself).

I'd make a good juror. If this comes to trial, I am certain there will be evidence to consider.

You may be right - perhaps there is none and we will all be here a year from now, wondering Where is Suzanne?

Because it happens. But I don't think she went off on her own. You'll never convince me that she did. And since WS isn't a court, we deal in more than just legal guilt. I want to know what happened to Suzanne Morphew.

I have a strong feeling that more will come out of this case - before a year is up. Until then, I see no way in which BM is helping find Suzanne. None. Nothing. Nada. Crickets. I don't believe there was this large search done by him and his amazing Army Ranger buddy (who has distanced himself from BM, AFAIK).

There was BM out near the house (we see that on TD's video) doing what-not. But Suzanne is not there, it's already been searched. And instead of directly TD to a search area, he waves vaguely.

I'd have USGS maps at the ready if I ran into a single person who might help....

 

[Midwestmom2019]

BBM:

The Frazee trial was a no-body case and that was absolutely a slam dunk for the prosecution.

DA May shattered the backboard and broke the rim.

Using another analogy, he hit the ball out of the park. Repeatedly.
Like PF with his victim, DA May didn't observe any mercy rule.
It was great seeing him swinging away repeatedly at PF after what PF did to Kelsey.

That same DA brought murder charges against LS for Gannon's murder before his remains were located.
So, he was fully prepared to prosecute another no-body case.
It was providential that GS's remains were found, but even if they hadn't been, based on what we know so far, I'm convinced that case would have been another slam dunk for the DA, body or no body.
Prosecution had >2,000 pages of discovery even before Gannon's body was found.

No-body cases unquestionably pose unique challenges.

But don't think they can't be won, and won decisively.

JMO.

Please. There is no slam dunk case for the prosecution. It’s long, hard and tedious work. They make it look easy. Like shooting a 3 pointer. But you get on the court. Take the ball. Toss it for 3 points. Did you slam dunk it? No? Oh, I'm so surprised. Want to try again? Again? Again? How many tosses a day? 300? That’s about right. See you back here tomorrow. For another 300 tosses.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

I have no clue as to how to read BM's reaction or demeanor. If he did something to Suzanne, either planned or accidently, I can see his actions interpreted as one with something to hide. OTH, if he is innocent and something did happen to happen to Suzanne either at the house or while out riding, his reactions and feelings could be those of guilt. And not of guilt because of something he did, but rather in his mind he DIDN'T do. And that was to be at home with Suzanne on Mother's Day. If he really was out of town and someone else was responsible for Suzanne's disappearance he could be blaming himself on some level and thinking this would not have happened had he been there that day. I have no idea what my reaction would be if that were case. Anger? Remorse and withdrawal? Even if this guy is innocent there will be those who ask the question: Why were you not there on Mother's Day?

Yeah, buddy, where the h... were you on Mother’s Day? Did you call your mother? Oh, I see. The cell towers were down? That’s terrible. Couldn't get a signal? How unfortunate. No land lines available? The nerve of those phone companies! Just make life impossible, don’t they?

 

[Dave F.]

Yeah, buddy, where the h... were you on Mother’s Day? Did you call your mother? Oh, I see. The cell towers were down? That’s terrible. Couldn't get a signal? How unfortunate. No land lines available? The nerve of those phone companies! Just make life impossible, don’t they?

Why is it assumed that he didn't call his mother? They appear to be quite close. I would assume that he did. IMO

 

[Cindizzi]

Just speculating, but I think Sheriff Spezze interjected the.. “hope he continues to do so” statement because sometime prior to that press conference, BM blasted either Spezze or his officers about their ‘handling’ of the bike.
MOO

The press conference was on May 15 and BM didn’t run into TD until 2 weeks later around June 1st.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I did click once and there is a little thing on the upper right of the WS screen that keeps flashing, wierd. Is that causing it? I don't know.

My tip:
If you have posted (clicking once on Reply) and the "thing" on top to the right is flashing further, you have to leave the thread. When you return back into the thread (you can do it immediately), the "thing" is gone and your text will be seen as successful posted.
If then your Reply shows up once more as a whole, this double post is open for deleting. You have to delete it and click on the symbol for Drafts save/delete. The field will be free and blank for your next poss. posting! - So are my experiences.

 

[kkdj]

Just coming on here tonight and skipped to the last posts.
Did something happen today?

 

[JerseyGirl]

Thread is full and will be closed. Please continue here:

CO - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #19