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

[MassGuy]

Trying to catch up!

I just need to say... I LOVE Lauren Scharf for getting right on that ID response!

MOO

When that ID Discovery Tweet was posted, I messaged Lauren to see if she could offer some clarity. It sounds like she was already on it at that point (not that it’s at all surprising).

“Yep! When I saw this I was shocked too so I immediately asked CBI to clarify.”

 

[BeckyF]

WHERE is this woman?! Have they, I hope, put her posters in surrounding states??

Nah

To find the abductor. How productive have these warrants been?

It hasn’t been reported by LE.

 

[Cassady]

When that ID Discovery Tweet was posted, I messaged Lauren to see if she could offer some clarity. It sounds like she was already on it at that point (not that it’s at all surprising).

“Yep! When I saw this I was shocked too so I immediately asked CBI to clarify.”

So she clarified that her CBI source did not participate in the IDD production and her CBI source referred her to the last statement from CCSO from about 20 days ago.

LS did not ask IDD who or what their source for their information was. IMO they would not tell her as they are competitors.

Has IDD retracted their statement?

IMO IDD could be working on a story about this case for one of their shows. They may have local sources for their info. They are a national network with some juice in the CJ world, so who knows what rocks their reporters can get under?

 

[EggSalad]

Regarding the slab dig. The recent comments by the neighbor reinforce my thought that the big-dig didn’t produce anything that links BM, or anything at all. I mean, why would BM, who lives in a relative solitude in an isolated home near acres of wilderness (and possessing his own heavy equipment) drive to a more densely populated “neighborhood” to conceal evidence. Not only that, but then he makes enough racket in the silent evening to wake the “deaf”. I’m not buying it. That site might have been a good concealment area for someone, but makes no sense for BM.

I’m kind of leaning towards (MOO) the equipment on site was what Barry needed to take with him to Denver on Sunday for his alibi. I’m assuming he is a small operation and has limited large equipment. He realized that in order to have the Denver alibi work, he needed to bring equipment out there with him. I think it was a late night scramble to get his stuff off one site and over to another.

LE would have a pretty easy time figuring this out through questioning Nd seeing what equipment BM owns.

 

[DizzyB]

I like all of the noise right now. I know that it’s not supposed to matter to the case, but the extra chatter gets people talking. Maybe some cages will be rattled.

 

[Seattle1]

Regarding the slab dig. The recent comments by the neighbor reinforce my thought that the big-dig didn’t produce anything that links BM, or anything at all. I mean, why would BM, who lives in a relative solitude in an isolated home near acres of wilderness (and possessing his own heavy equipment) drive to a more densely populated “neighborhood” to conceal evidence. Not only that, but then he makes enough racket in the silent evening to wake the “deaf”. I’m not buying it. That site might have been a good concealment area for someone, but makes no sense for BM.

While I never suspected that BM himself was creating noise at the search site in the middle of the night, I never doubted that it could have been BM's own heavy equipment in use that night. BM had been hired by the owner to perform work at the site, and it would not be unusual for his equipment to remain on-site even when he was not there. We don't know if BM had employees on that job or if he self-performed the work. (A contractor doesn't typically de-mob his equipment until he's finished with his contracted work).

I first learned about the search of the residential construction site while it was in progress and caught a live video news snippet of a reporter talking on the street to a man that said he was in town for mother's day weekend. He told the reporter that his mom told him she heard construction noise in the middle of the night and they believed it could have been heavy equipment operating because it made her windows rattle. I have no idea if this is the same neighbor lady recently featured in Fox21/LS report.

MOO

ETA: I'm of the opinion the equipment was in operation as opposed to being moved on to the trailer and hauled away.

 

[Charlot123]

Or, and bear with me here, the CBI and FBI actually know what they are doing, <modsnip: stating opinion as fact>

I suspect this case will be interesting, with more details surfacing as it goes on. There might be different reasons why the LE and other organizations are not in a haste to close it. MOO.

 

[MassGuy]

So she clarified that her CBI source did not participate in the IDD production and her CBI source referred her to the last statement from CCSO from about 20 days ago.

LS did not ask IDD who or what their source for their information was. IMO they would not tell her as they are competitors.

Has IDD retracted their statement?

IMO IDD could be working on a story about this case for one of their shows. They may have local sources for their info. They are a national network with some juice in the CJ world, so who knows what rocks their reporters can get under?

Lauren’s source was likely the CBI spokesperson. I think she’s probably more connected than anyone.

So these “officials” have said that BM is not a suspect, but the bike was still “reportedly found” and Barry was “reportedly in Denver at the time?”

That doesn’t follow at all. Wouldn’t these people know those things?

Besides that, ID has done this exact same type of thing for countless other cases in the news.

Dateline does the same, as they publicize stories in this way when they aren’t even producing a show on them.

Who said this? Who did they say it to? When did they say it?

Why has not a single other outlet reported that Barry was cleared?

I think it’s a safe bet that we aren’t going to see any corroboration, because this wasn’t a news story with sources (other than previous reporting).

 

[Kittybunny]

FBI Joins Search to Find Missing Colorado Woman, Family Offers $200,000 Reward

Old article. Found this bit regarding TN very interesting...

“Spezze also said that Morphew’s husband was reportedly out of town in Denver when Morphew went missing but declined to say whether he is actively cooperating with the investigation. Similarly, authorities did not disclose whether Morphew’s nephew, Trevor Noel is cooperating with the investigation.“

BBM

When I first started following this case I was actually somewhat suspicious of the nephew, I couldn't figure out why he and not "the husband" was so actively pushing a specific narrative. I wasn't sure if it was because he lived with them or something else was going on. After further research and following the case, the something else, in my opinion, is the strong puppet master behind the scenes.

On a related topic, no pun intended, there's been a little bit of discussion about BM's mom and her presence. In so many of these cases, we have seen the mothers' of the POIs disparaging the victims online and on the news. Even in forums like these. Ma Watts, Ma Frazee, Ma Peterson so many times there is an enabling toxic mom behind the scenes. Thus far this doesn't seem to be the case, thank goodness.

 

[Madeleine74]

I think it’s a safe bet that we aren’t going to see any corroboration, because this wasn’t a news story with sources (other than previous reporting).

It's a good reminder why media stories are not considered evidence. The errors they make can be eyerollingly bad.

IMO

 

[Cassady]

Lauren’s source was likely the CBI spokesperson. I think she’s probably more connected than anyone.

So these “officials” have said that BM is not a suspect, but the bike was still “reportedly found” and Barry was “reportedly in Denver at the time?”

That doesn’t follow at all. Wouldn’t these people know those things?

Besides that, ID has done this exact same type of thing for countless other cases in the news.

Dateline does the same, as they publicize stories in this way when they aren’t even producing a show on them.

Who said this? Who did they say it to? When did they say it?

Why has not a single other outlet reported that Barry was cleared?

I think it’s a safe bet that we aren’t going to see any corroboration, because this wasn’t a news story with sources (other than previous reporting).

Except it has never been reported anywhere that officials indicated that the spouse of the missing person was not responsible for her disappearance. That is why it was new. That is why LS said she was shocked (& probably thinking she was scooped by IDD).

IDD either pulled that out of thin air or they have a source.

 

[AdyStand]

Lauren’s source was likely the CBI spokesperson. I think she’s probably more connected than anyone.

So these “officials” have said that BM is not a suspect, but the bike was still “reportedly found” and Barry was “reportedly in Denver at the time?”

That doesn’t follow at all. Wouldn’t these people know those things?

Besides that, ID has done this exact same type of thing for countless other cases in the news.

Dateline does the same, as they publicize stories in this way when they aren’t even producing a show on them.

Who said this? Who did they say it to? When did they say it?

Why has not a single other outlet reported that Barry was cleared?

I think it’s a safe bet that we aren’t going to see any corroboration, because this wasn’t a news story with sources (other than previous reporting).

As a person that also works in News. I can say this was what we call Click Bait to a popular story to get hits to the website. The graphics person who was asked to put it together was told what to include and they didn't get it exactly right. That person will probably be asked to do a better job next time, but tonight they will be happy about all the views. IMO.

 

[susiQ]

Except it has never been reported anywhere that officials indicated that the spouse of the missing person was not responsible for her disappearance. That is why it was new. That is why LS said she was shocked (& probably thinking she was scooped by IDD).

IDD either pulled that out of thin air or they have a source.

I’m going to go with “they have a source.” The “source” is BM himself talking to TD. So actually, BM likely pulled that out of thin air.

 

[KLM6]

Except it has never been reported anywhere that officials indicated that the spouse of the missing person was not responsible for her disappearance. That is why it was new. That is why LS said she was shocked (& probably thinking she was scooped by IDD).

IDD either pulled that out of thin air or they have a source.

Imo, as tight lipped as this case has been up to now, I would be hard pressed to believe any 'officials' would provide any inside scoop beyond what has been stated by the CBI Spokesperson and the Sheriff. Especially without their knowledge and permission.

 

[Megnut]

The monster who murdered precious Gannon declared herself cleared. During the same period that LE was amassing a massive case against her. She was arrested not long after her self-made pronouncement. I will give credence to statements of cleared when they come from LE.

I wonder if it's too soon for another pre-recorded fb plea.

JMO

 

[oviedo]

Every single Colorado case I have followed that involved those agencies.

The silence, their posture, the warrants.

What they have done, and what they have not done.

A pattern of success, and behavior just like this.

My expectation that this is going to be a slog, and knowledge that a case like this isn’t typically solved in a few months.

ITA
Imo

 

[Warwick7]

So she clarified that her CBI source did not participate in the IDD production and her CBI source referred her to the last statement from CCSO from about 20 days ago.

LS did not ask IDD who or what their source for their information was. IMO they would not tell her as they are competitors.

Has IDD retracted their statement?

IMO IDD could be working on a story about this case for one of their shows. They may have local sources for their info. They are a national network with some juice in the CJ world, so who knows what rocks their reporters can get under?

I must be having a blonde moment.
I do not understand a thing you are saying.

 

[GordianKnot]

Except it has never been reported anywhere that officials indicated that the spouse of the missing person was not responsible for her disappearance. That is why it was new. That is why LS said she was shocked (& probably thinking she was scooped by IDD).

IDD either pulled that out of thin air or they have a source.

BBM:

There's actually a third option:

It could be a really sloppy reporting error.

JMO.

 

[Dr.StClements]

Are you saying this neighbor lady is being untruthful? You say you aren’t buying it and she knows exactly which night she heard the noises. You say she knew it was a huge news story and that LE searched the property.

Do you actually think that her interview with LS is the first she has told anyone? You say that in your opinion there’s several reasons she withheld this information. Withheld from who? Law enforcement or media? What reasons?

The search of the property was 2 weeks after SM went missing. Why would this lady know to connect the noises to BM before the search? It sounds like you are saying she should have reported it right away. ( Before SM was even in the news.)

I can completely see myself looking back 2 weeks ago and not remembering if I heard something on a Friday night or Saturday night, but being 100% sure of the weekend it happened.

I’m just wondering why you don’t believe her account.
JMO

I concur with what you say - there's also the point that this woman made about going to see the site work staff (the following day?) ask them whether keys to vehicles being used to work the site were left in vehicles overnight, and she also conveyed the site worker/s response/s (that they were left on site, but hidden). All this information she disclosed can easily be (and no doubt has been) corroborated by LE interviews.
What is striking, IMO, is that we are only now hearing this information, which upholds the theory that LE is running a very tight investigation, as yet uncompromised by information leaks. I find this impressive.

The woman reporting the unusual time for the noise of a truck or similar engine to be running at the site also mentioned that she had been interviewed by LE after reporting it. She had the nouse to ask workmen at the site next day because she realized something was amiss (I'm not suggesting that her suspicions were related to BM, but rather that she was being a good neighbor, concerned generally to know why trucks were being started up in dead of night - she might have thought they were being stolen).

I would have to go back some way to dig out the original source of info that quoted the owner of the worksite as getting in touch with police soon after BM had been at his property on MD -Sunday to lay earth foundations that day in time for concrete delivery the next day. The owner was reported to have contacted the police soon after this when he realized it was BM's wife who was missing. The owner made other points in this same interview (if the information source is to believed - it was reported in a newspaper within a week of the site search by LE and the FBI); these points included that he didn't know BM and that BM had approached the owner and priced and started the work within a short time span. BM had also contacted him just before to explain why he wanted/needed to work at the site on Mother's Day. BM was reported to have been there on his own.
So there are (at least) two separate accounts where unconnected individuals contacted police about activities occurring at different times on that same worksite.
None of us has any entitlement to information that LE has unless there is a risk to the public, in which case they would have to share it, proportionate to risks involved. It is only my opinion, but I do believe that LE has amassed a considerable amount of evidence - whether empirical, circumstantial, or, more likely, a complex mix. Not having found SM's body makes their job much more difficult, but not impossible.
I have little time for the guy who conducted an impromptu "interview" with BM close to his house, simply because I don't believe that he is being authentic when he says his primary concern is to search for SM. He's after a story, first and foremost. That said, he's opportunistically provided LE with potential clues in at least two key areas. The first was when BM relayed information to him about the position of the bike when it was found (wheel upturned?), then abruptly stopped himself mid-sentence and changed the subject. The second point was about seeing/meeting BM when he was soaking wet. He didn't elaborate whether he was soaking wet with sweat or looked like he'd been swimming/in water in his clothes. This information made me sit up immediately: if the latter, where had BM been/what had he been doing? DNA evidence is washed away when bodies are immersed in water, a fact known by some murderers. Also, gases produced by decomposing bodies can aid their buoyancy. Unless a body is adequately weighted down it is liable to shift, or even rise to the surface days after being submerged.
I recall a case in the UK in 2014 (Alice Gross murder) where it transpired that the murderer returned to the crime scene on at least three occasions within a month of murdering his victim. He killed her on land, then hid her body underwater in a river, weighing her body down with tree logs. He knew that submerging her would wash away a lot of vital DNA evidence. He reportedly returned to the crime scene to pile more logs on her, because he knew there was a risk of her body shifting as buoyancy potentially increased.
We live in a world where such facts are readily accessible to the curious, whatever their motives. Anyone with the wherewithal to access such information as part of a premeditated crime can do so if they have the IT resources.
But most behaviors leave some form of audit trail...

 

[Dr.StClements]

I concur with what you say - there's also the point that this woman made about going to see the site work staff (the following day?) ask them whether keys to vehicles being used to work the site were left in vehicles overnight, and she also conveyed the site worker/s response/s (that they were left on site, but hidden). All this information she disclosed can easily be (and no doubt has been) corroborated by LE interviews.
What is striking, IMO, is that we are only now hearing this information, which upholds the theory that LE is running a very tight investigation, as yet uncompromised by information leaks. I find this impressive.

The woman reporting the unusual time for the noise of a truck or similar engine to be running at the site also mentioned that she had been interviewed by LE after reporting it. She had the nouse to ask workmen at the site next day because she realized something was amiss (I'm not suggesting that her suspicions were related to BM, but rather that she was being a good neighbor, concerned generally to know why trucks were being started up in dead of night - she might have thought they were being stolen).

I would have to go back some way to dig out the original source of info that quoted the owner of the worksite as getting in touch with police soon after BM had been at his property on MD -Sunday to lay earth foundations that day in time for concrete delivery the next day. The owner was reported to have contacted the police soon after this when he realized it was BM's wife who was missing. The owner made other points in this same interview (if the information source is to believed - it was reported in a newspaper within a week of the site search by LE and the FBI); these points included that he didn't know BM and that BM had approached the owner and priced and started the work within a short time span. BM had also contacted him just before to explain why he wanted/needed to work at the site on Mother's Day. BM was reported to have been there on his own.
So there are (at least) two separate accounts where unconnected individuals contacted police about activities occurring at different times on that same worksite.
None of us has any entitlement to information that LE has unless there is a risk to the public, in which case they would have to share it, proportionate to risks involved. It is only my opinion, but I do believe that LE has amassed a considerable amount of evidence - whether empirical, circumstantial, or, more likely, a complex mix. Not having found SM's body makes their job much more difficult, but not impossible.
I have little time for the guy who conducted an impromptu "interview" with BM close to his house, simply because I don't believe that he is being authentic when he says his primary concern is to search for SM. He's after a story, first and foremost. That said, he's opportunistically provided LE with potential clues in at least two key areas. The first was when BM relayed information to him about the position of the bike when it was found (wheel upturned?), then abruptly stopped himself mid-sentence and changed the subject. The second point was about seeing/meeting BM when he was soaking wet. He didn't elaborate whether he was soaking wet with sweat or looked like he'd been swimming/in water in his clothes. This information made me sit up immediately: if the latter, where had BM been/what had he been doing? DNA evidence is washed away when bodies are immersed in water, a fact known by some murderers. Also, gases produced by decomposing bodies can aid their buoyancy. Unless a body is adequately weighted down it is liable to shift, or even rise to the surface days after being submerged.
I recall a case in the UK in 2014 (Alice Gross murder) where it transpired that the murderer returned to the crime scene on at least three occasions within a month of murdering his victim. He killed her on land, then hid her body underwater in a river, weighing her body down with tree logs. He knew that submerging her would wash away a lot of vital DNA evidence. He reportedly returned to the crime scene to pile more logs on her, because he knew there was a risk of her body shifting as buoyancy potentially increased.
We live in a world where such facts are readily accessible to the curious, whatever their motives. Anyone with the wherewithal to access such information as part of a premeditated crime can do so if they have the IT resources.
But most behaviors leave some form of audit trail...

Apologies - I meant to add that that the murderer of AG went underwater to access her body to check it was sufficiently weighted down/hadn't moved. It was alongside a part of the river accessible to the public and he'd have appeared soaking wet to people who anyone who saw him. Sorry for the omission.