Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #22

[Fireflize]

One could also assume that Sherriff Speeze had a pretty solid rolodex of CBI and FBI connections given his work in Denver and had built good working relationships with them over the years. So when he called for help, there wasn’t a delay or questioning of why help was needed.

ITA. I feel this case has been fortunate to have sheriff Speeze in place. His past work for the Denver police department was priceless. He was well aware of the contrast between the resources of Chaffee County, verses Denver. He knew he needed help and he got it.
Moo

 

[RumorMonger]

Regarding search warrants and searching the family home, this MSM article says that the house is being held but that there is no search underway. Should I understand that to mean LE does not yet have a SW but has somehow barred entry to the home anyway or that LE does have a SW but simply hasn't started the search? Or something else?

"Her family is not being allowed to enter the house....While there was no active search Tuesday, the sheriff’s office said investigators were following up on tips and conducting interviews."

Authorities cordon off home of missing Chaffee County woman | FOX31 Denver

I don't know if the answer means anything either way, I'm mostly just curious. TIA

 

[Minordetails]

If Sheriff Spezze and BM were acquaintances, would Sheriff Spezze have been expected to recuse himself from the investigation?

I realize there is no evidence to suggest this, other than their daughters were on the same high school basketball team.

 

[Tate123]

The point is that if this was only a local homicide involving a local suspect, only the CBI would come in to assist local LE...IMO.

The FBI usually only gets involved in investigating crimes that have some sort of federal/interstate nexus...IMO

1035. FBI Assistance in Missing Persons Cases

1035. FBI ASSISTANCE IN MISSING PERSONS CASES
In a missing person case, as a matter of cooperation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) will, at the request of a state or local law enforcement agency, make available the facilities of the FBI Identification Division and the FBI Laboratory.

 

[OldCop]

@OldCop if you’ll look at my post #630 in this thread, you’ll find the video @firefly1230 references. The exchange starts around the 24:00 mark. I also would like another opinion on the difficulty of obtaining a second search warrant for the Morphew home. Great post @Fireflize

@Fireflize and @Error505, we have talked a lot about the need for probable cause to obtain a search warrant. When a judge accepts the affidavit and approves the warrant, he/she expects that you will be diligent in your search, that you will be thorough, that you will execute the warrant per it’s conditions i.e. you will limit your search as to what’s outlined in the warrant, that it will be done within its time constraints, etc
You can not go back to a judge and say that maybe you didn’t look hard enough or in the right places and you would like to give it a second try. You have to go back with a new pc affidavit with new compelling reasons as to why you should be allowed to search the same place a second time. There could be many reasons for the request, but they can’t be the same reasons. Perhaps a new witness has come forward providing information, perhaps lab results from the first search will warrant additional examination of the premises, LE may have received new video information. There has to be new information and it must be compelling.
You are constitutionally protected against unlawful search and seizure. As I stated in a previous post, these searches can not be fishing expeditions. Any judge worth his salt will insure there are valid, legal reasons why LE should be allowed a warrant to search a premises, property, or vehicle, that has been previously searched.
The fact that the second warrant was issued says to me that LE has uncovered new information. We do not know what it is, but it serves to convince us that LE remains committed to this case and determined to find out what happened to SM.
MOO

 

[Midwestmom2019]

I read somewhere early on (not a clue where - edited below for the timing) the FBI ERT (evidence response team) was brought in at the CCSO request because of their specific expertise on handling evidence that the CCSO doesn't have on staff.
I can only assume the same for CBI.
It's the logical move to make, when you've got a case like this, and the county in charge has deputies that are literally juggling several different roles.
About Operations - Chaffee County Sheriff

ETA: It is interesting that as early as 05.13 the CBI and the FBI were already on board. Update on Suzanne Morphew search Tipline established - Chaffee County Sheriff

"In addition to efforts by the Chaffee County Sheriff’s Office and assistance from local and regional partners, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have been requested to provide resources to aid in the effort." Search continues for Suzanne Morphew - Chaffee County Sheriff

Sheriff must be a humble man who knows what he and his department are capable of handling on their own. For him to call back up LE, so quickly, tells me he’s brilliant, too. He knew thorough investigation and no mistakes would need more than he and his department could provide. His ego did not get in the way of seeking assistance. I applaud him. CLAP CLAP CLAP.

 

[Tate123]

@Fireflize and @Error505, we have talked a lot about the need for probable cause to obtain a search warrant. When a judge accepts the affidavit and approves the warrant, he/she expects that you will be diligent in your search, that you will be thorough, that you will execute the warrant per it’s conditions i.e. you will limit your search as to what’s outlined in the warrant, that it will be done within its time constraints, etc
You can not go back to a judge and say that maybe you didn’t look hard enough or in the right places and you would like to give it a second try. You have to go back with a new pc affidavit with new compelling reasons as to why you should be allowed to search the same place a second time. There could be many reasons for the request, but they can’t be the same reasons. Perhaps a new witness has come forward providing information, perhaps lab results from the first search will warrant additional examination of the premises, LE may have received new video information. There has to be new information and it must be compelling.
You are constitutionally protected against unlawful search and seizure. As I stated in a previous post, these searches can not be fishing expeditions. Any judge worth his salt will insure there are valid, legal reasons why LE should be allowed a warrant to search a premises, property, or vehicle, that has been previously searched.
The fact that the second warrant was issued says to me that LE has uncovered new information. We do not know what it is, but it serves to convince us that LE remains committed to this case and determined to find out what happened to SM.
MOO

We are so lucky to have you @OldCop!

 

[Janeumayer]

If the house was the crime scene, which I definitely think was the case, then that means the bike was staged.

If the bike was staged, then the killer was trying to throw off authorities.

People who try to throw off authorities, are trying to draw attention away from where it would otherwise go. These people are almost invariably close to the victim.

In this case, it would (almost certainly) be an effort to draw attention away from her husband. My guess is that there is going to be evidence of a cleanup at the house as well.

If this involved someone from Indiana for example, then none of that makes any sense. There’s no reason to take the body, or stage the scene.

It also makes no sense that law enforcement would even consider BM’s work site as an area of interest.

Ok, let’s say someone is leaning on the BM didn’t do it side. Both house search warrants do point at the house as the place where I would gather an attack took place BUT the attacker could have been someone visiting SM. Someone local, close to SM, that knows SM occasionally rides her bicycle and could have also planted the bike.
And let’s say that the search warrant at the construction site was a fluke. Maybe a neighbor, knowing BM worked at the site, suspecting him, also heard the noises the night before SM’s disappearance and called that tip in. Maybe authorities didn’t find anything. And we are left with the house and the rest of the evidence.
Of course, this is just me imagining another scenario.
MOO IMO

 

[Warwick7]

@Fireflize and @Error505, we have talked a lot about the need for probable cause to obtain a search warrant. When a judge accepts the affidavit and approves the warrant, he/she expects that you will be diligent in your search, that you will be thorough, that you will execute the warrant per it’s conditions i.e. you will limit your search as to what’s outlined in the warrant, that it will be done within its time constraints, etc
You can not go back to a judge and say that maybe you didn’t look hard enough or in the right places and you would like to give it a second try. You have to go back with a new pc affidavit with new compelling reasons as to why you should be allowed to search the same place a second time. There could be many reasons for the request, but they can’t be the same reasons. Perhaps a new witness has come forward providing information, perhaps lab results from the first search will warrant additional examination of the premises, LE may have received new video information. There has to be new information and it must be compelling.
You are constitutionally protected against unlawful search and seizure. As I stated in a previous post, these searches can not be fishing expeditions. Any judge worth his salt will insure there are valid, legal reasons why LE should be allowed a warrant to search a premises, property, or vehicle, that has been previously searched.
The fact that the second warrant was issued says to me that LE has uncovered new information. We do not know what it is, but it serves to convince us that LE remains committed to this case and determined to find out what happened to SM.
MOO

Well, I hadn't caught your previous post. So I'm glad you posted this here.

Excellent excellent post!

 

[MsBetsy]

The point is that if this was only a local homicide involving a local suspect, only the CBI would come in to assist local LE...IMO.

The FBI usually only gets involved in investigating crimes that have some sort of federal/interstate nexus...IMO

I think the FBI gets involved in a case like this whenever LE asks for their assistance.

 

[Fireflize]

1035. FBI Assistance in Missing Persons Cases

1035. FBI ASSISTANCE IN MISSING PERSONS CASES
In a missing person case, as a matter of cooperation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) will, at the request of a state or local law enforcement agency, make available the facilities of the FBI Identification Division and the FBI Laboratory.

Yes, and free of charge! Moo

 

[oviedo]

@Fireflize and @Error505, we have talked a lot about the need for probable cause to obtain a search warrant. When a judge accepts the affidavit and approves the warrant, he/she expects that you will be diligent in your search, that you will be thorough, that you will execute the warrant per it’s conditions i.e. you will limit your search as to what’s outlined in the warrant, that it will be done within its time constraints, etc
You can not go back to a judge and say that maybe you didn’t look hard enough or in the right places and you would like to give it a second try. You have to go back with a new pc affidavit with new compelling reasons as to why you should be allowed to search the same place a second time. There could be many reasons for the request, but they can’t be the same reasons. Perhaps a new witness has come forward providing information, perhaps lab results from the first search will warrant additional examination of the premises, LE may have received new video information. There has to be new information and it must be compelling.
You are constitutionally protected against unlawful search and seizure. As I stated in a previous post, these searches can not be fishing expeditions. Any judge worth his salt will insure there are valid, legal reasons why LE should be allowed a warrant to search a premises, property, or vehicle, that has been previously searched.
The fact that the second warrant was issued says to me that LE has uncovered new information. We do not know what it is, but it serves to convince us that LE remains committed to this case and determined to find out what happened to SM.
MOO

and could the second warrant be due to evidence tested from the first warrant which would require them to return to the house for more collection - or is a whole new situation ?

 

[TKG]

Well, I hadn't caught your previous post. So I'm glad you posted this here.

Excellent excellent post!

@OldCop So glad you are here with invaluable experience!

 

[MsBetsy]

“According to officials he has been fully cooperative, and they do not believe he is involved in Suzanne’s disappearance.”

Boy, I’d love to hear where they got that!

They may have gotten that information from Barry himself, when was being recorded by the guy that posted the video on SM. I can't remember the guys name but didn't Barry tell him he had been ruled out?

 

[Madeleine74]

“According to officials he has been fully cooperative, and they do not believe he is involved in Suzanne’s disappearance.”

Boy, I’d love to hear where they got that!

DiscoveryID is just "speculating." (aka creative license)

IMO

 

[LietKynes]

@Fireflize and @Error505, we have talked a lot about the need for probable cause to obtain a search warrant. When a judge accepts the affidavit and approves the warrant, he/she expects that you will be diligent in your search, that you will be thorough, that you will execute the warrant per it’s conditions i.e. you will limit your search as to what’s outlined in the warrant, that it will be done within its time constraints, etc
You can not go back to a judge and say that maybe you didn’t look hard enough or in the right places and you would like to give it a second try. You have to go back with a new pc affidavit with new compelling reasons as to why you should be allowed to search the same place a second time. There could be many reasons for the request, but they can’t be the same reasons. Perhaps a new witness has come forward providing information, perhaps lab results from the first search will warrant additional examination of the premises, LE may have received new video information. There has to be new information and it must be compelling.
You are constitutionally protected against unlawful search and seizure. As I stated in a previous post, these searches can not be fishing expeditions. Any judge worth his salt will insure there are valid, legal reasons why LE should be allowed a warrant to search a premises, property, or vehicle, that has been previously searched.
The fact that the second warrant was issued says to me that LE has uncovered new information. We do not know what it is, but it serves to convince us that LE remains committed to this case and determined to find out what happened to SM.
MOO

bbm
Great comment.
These two options would be my guess at this time.

 

[kay74]

They may have gotten that information from Barry himself, when was being recorded by the guy that posted the video on SM. I can't remember the guys name but didn't Barry tell him he had been ruled out?

He said he's been cleared.

 

[Tate123]

They may have gotten that information from Barry himself, when was being recorded by the guy that posted the video on SM. I can't remember the guys name but didn't Barry tell him he had been ruled out?

Yes.. BM told TD that he had been cleared by LE. Of course LE came out later saying that NO ONE had been cleared and it was an ongoing investigation.

 

[OldCop]

If Sheriff Spezze and BM were acquaintances, would Sheriff Spezze have been expected to recuse himself from the investigation?

I realize there is no evidence to suggest this, other than their daughters were on the same high school basketball team.

Not necessarily. If that were the case, every time a major crime was committed in Smalltown USA, the sheriff or police chief would be recusing themself. However, if a strong POI is developed, and the Chief or lead investigator is a close, personal friend of the POI, they may step back in order to avoid implications of impropriety. If a chief knew that one of his investigators was close to a POI, he would likely order him off the investigation.

 

[Madeleine74]

Regarding search warrants and searching the family home, this MSM article says that the house is being held but that there is no search underway. Should I understand that to mean LE does not yet have a SW but has somehow barred entry to the home anyway or that LE does have a SW but simply hasn't started the search? Or something else?

"Her family is not being allowed to enter the house....While there was no active search Tuesday, the sheriff’s office said investigators were following up on tips and conducting interviews."

Authorities cordon off home of missing Chaffee County woman | FOX31 Denver

I don't know if the answer means anything either way, I'm mostly just curious. TIA

It can mean they're waiting on a search warrant to be completed and then reviewed and signed by a judge. It can take several hours to get it done.

IMO