Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #23

[lamlawindy]

IIRC, we all speculated that the sale had been in process before SM disappeared, and the buyers/realtors/others in on the transaction really needed the sale to go through on the designated date, or everyone would be in a pickle legally. (Imagine if you were the buyer, and had already sold your house in order to move into the M house? And the banks had already arranged the loans, etc., etc.?) I think the judge agreed to this one-time designation of SM as 'incapacitated' so this one transaction could be completed. The Sept. 1 hearing is to determine whether that designation should continue.

That is correct. The Morphews would've been in breach of their sale contract had the sale not closed.

 

[MassGuy]

According to the Teller County PIO, the woman found in the Skaguay Reservoir on Friday is NOT #SuzanneMorphew It was a woman who was terminally ill and died by suicide for her family. #FindSuzanne @FOX21News


https://twitter.com/laurenscharftv/status/1290084758849040391?s=21

 

[lamlawindy]

It's a large house on seven acres. It may take days to completely search the basement, two floors, and an attic plus a barn or shed, not to mention all that forest land along a river. The amount of time a search takes depends on how big the search area is and what may have been found. IMO

Maybe I'm incorrect, but my understanding was that the original post was about "freezing" the situation and not allowing Barry Morphew into the house until a warrant was secured. My point was that a ten-day seizure of the house to get the warrant would be unreasonable. A ten-day search of the home and acreage -- which you correctly point out is considerable -- is not unreasonable, IMHO.

 

[kkdj]

^^sbm

The more I learned about the family and the CCSO since the date SM missing made the news, I believe that the neighbor, that actually lives some distance from the Morphew residence, was contacted by the daughters to see if SM was home since they could not reach her and/or SM had not been responding to their texts for several hours if not all day. I don't believe they (daughters) had her on a mission to locate SM's bike. I think that red-herring was all BM and not the focus of the daughters.

I think the neighbor went to the home and after she got no response from SM at the door, she notified BM that SM was not answering and he requested she contact 911 and report that SM was missing.

MSM reported that after dispatch received the 911 call, CCSO responded by traveling to Maysville and taking a report from the caller (i.e., neighbor).

I believe it more likely that CCSO were the ones that checked out the residence for SM's bike in the garage and/or around the property, accounted for SM's vehicle, etc,. and not the elderly neighbor.

Even if the neighbor or LE found SM's bike put away inside the garage, it would have meant nothing here because bike or no bike, SM was still missing. She still was out of contact with her family, she wasn't home, and she wasn't expected to be anywhere else-- except maybe a morning bike ride prior to church services that were temporarily suspended due to COVID (a story eagerly being promoted by BM as soon as he got back to town -- obviously forgetting about the suspension of in-person services).

I don't think the daughters had been able to reach SM since at least Saturday -- last in touch with her Friday. I also don't think they believed that SM had planned a bike ride on Sunday. At least not until after she talked to her girls on Mother's Day. I think this type of logic by the daughters was not lost on the investigators.

MOO

Why did BM assume SM was missing?
Wouldn't one wonder if she had fallen in the house, maybe passed out, perhaps injured, maybe a seizure or anything before just stating that she's missing?
Or maybe wonder if she's visiting a friend?
Or maybe wonder if someone broke into the house with her alone there?
Why assume she was missing?
Oh wait. I think I might know the answer to my own question.

 

[lamlawindy]

Do you think this was more misinformation about the case? We really don’t know about how long LE had the house, with the exception of during the two SWs.

Possibly. IMHO, seizing a residence for 10 days prior to a warrant being issued would be a problematic for any case against Barry Morphew. If Barry Morphew was charged with a crime, any evidence obtained could be subject to suppression due to that seizure (the evidence would be "fruit of the poisonous tree" of the unlawful seizure). Moreover, if the fact of the ten-day seizure was not included in the warrant probable cause affidavit, there's a good chance that the judge who signed the warrant is going to be really displeased & think that maybe officers were intentionally hiding that fact from him/her.

However, if a person other than Barry Morphew* is charged with a crime against Suzanne, then the unlawful seizure wouldn't prevent the evidence from being introduced against that person, since the seizure of the home did not violate that person's constitutional rights.

* While it's true that the Morphew daughters would have standing to challenge the unlawful seizure because they live at the home, my understanding is that their Idaho alibis are iron-clad.

 

[lamlawindy]

Until proven otherwise, I think it's possible that BM agreed or consented to stay away from the residence while police were investigating a possible abduction --that BM also suggested happened to SM. BM could have simply been cooperating with LE prior to the search warrant (for the optics) when LE legally took custody of the residence.

Yes, in fact, I think that's the most likely scenario. I cannot say, however, if it was "for the optics" or because he genuinely wanted to help.

 

[10ofRods]

It's a large house on seven acres. It may take days to completely search the basement, two floors, and an attic plus a barn or shed, not to mention all that forest land along a river. The amount of time a search takes depends on how big the search area is and what may have been found. IMO

The house is not that big (3500 sf). It doesn't have a basement. Per Zillow/assessor's records.

It has a 3 car garage and no visible out-buildings on the property.

But the forensic search of a 3500 sf house can easily take a week.

I'm pretty sure the acreage and the immediate surroundings were searched multiple times in the first 3 days.

The amount of time also relates to what kind of evidence they're finding. Things that may be microscopic or involve chemical analysis may take time.

 

[lamlawindy]

Thank you @Seattle1 for this info! A transaction took place on the same date as the Order conveying the Indiana property to a BM entity according to the Hamilton County Recorder's Office. Was there some urgency in completing that transfer while SM is still missing or has she found and is incapacitated? IMO, that's strange.

Yes, as the Petition indicated, the Morphews would've breached their sale contract if the closing didn't occur.

 

[lamlawindy]

My bet is permanent guardianship of the person and property and it seems IN is friendly to this IMO- however I think this jurisdiction should be transferred to CO if he has taken care of all the IN property owned by her either alone or Joint and he should be forced to allow CO courts to rule
IMO

I'm fairly certain that the court will limit its its ruling to Indiana property. The Morphews' domicile is Colorado; the only reason that guardianship in Indiana is necessary is because of the real estate located here.

 

[kkdj]

I'm fairly certain that the court will limit its its ruling to Indiana property. The Morphews' domicile is Colorado; the only reason that guardianship in Indiana is necessary is because of the real estate located here.

Was it specific to the property in escrow?

 

[lamlawindy]

Thank you @Kimmer for the info. I'm still confused because the Petition is for an Incapacitated Person, not a Missing Person. A Guardian is usually appointed for a person whose whereabouts are known, right? I've seen it where an elderly person needs help with finances, home care, or in a nursing home. Is it possible that she was found injured since we've heard nothing further about her from family, friends or even LE. MOO

No, the Indiana Gen'l Assembly has defined an "incapacitated person" to include -- among other things -- "an individual who...cannot be located upon reasonable inquiry." Indiana Code § 29-3-1-7.5.

 

[lamlawindy]

Was it specific to the property in escrow?

No, that's not what I meant: It's my opinion that the court will address only property in Indiana & will not address any Colorado property. I was replying to @oviedo's concern regarding the guardianship and non-Indiana property.

The reason for this is chiefly that an Indiana court is not well-prepared to handle supervision of an estate that includes marital assets (and land) in Colorado. This isn't a criticism of Judge Casati, who is a very good judge, but the reality that oversight of an estate is more efficient and proper in the state where the parties are domiciled.

 

[BeckyF]

shoot. i got quite excited there was a court date coming up tomorrow!

i tell you what is coming up wednesday though, a 27- year wedding anniversary. that has to be causing a little bit of stress.

Or relief on someone’s part they don’t have to buy a card or flowers

 

[Feistyomi]

I would be begging the state police to give me an escort.

IMO, there wasn’t much BM could do from Denver, the process had been initiated, and while he may have been extremely worried, it’s also possible, he did not actually believe anything serious had happened.
The nature of their relationship could answer some of our questions.
IMO, if every spouse requested an escort, when they can’t reach their spouse, that would be the proverbial “crying wolf”.
I’ve had experience dealing w/ slightly similar situations, as my husband is retired military and commercial pilot. Whenever a plane crashes, you are immediately on alert, you can’t fall to pieces, w/o the details. Your heart stops, but you keep going, sometimes on auto pilot.
When you have young kids, or even older children, who are fragile in nature, you try to maintain a calm facade.
I’m sure I would likely have reacted similarly to BM, I would have tied up things in Denver, as best as possible, not neatly, but as quickly as possible.
I’d have driven like a bat out of hell, unless I was on phone, there are after all, other drivers on the roads. I would have gotten updates along the way.
I look back on the crises in my family’s life, married 45 yrs, nothing of this type, more of the “dropped the purple Martin house on head, slashed skull, bleeding,”you don’t always wait on ambulance, you do get tunnel vision. You drive as quickly as allowed, safely...traffic is a factor...
IMO, you can drive(speed) or make calls.

Heck, it’s possible he made excellent time, given all the details we don’t know.

 

[lamlawindy]

Yes it’s shocking but not all states allow the missing to be determined as incapacitated- it’s dangerous IMO

It may appear to create a perverse incentive in some situations for the would-be guardian to ensure that the would-be ward "cannot be located upon reasonable inquiry." In defense of our General Assembly (& I don't often use that phrase ), I don't know of any cases where it's actually posed a problem.

 

[10ofRods]

Possibly. IMHO, seizing a residence for 10 days prior to a warrant being issued would be a problematic for any case against Barry Morphew. If Barry Morphew was charged with a crime, any evidence obtained could be subject to suppression due to that seizure (the evidence would be "fruit of the poisonous tree" of the unlawful seizure). Moreover, if the fact of the ten-day seizure was not included in the warrant probable cause affidavit, there's a good chance that the judge who signed the warrant is going to be really displeased & think that maybe officers were intentionally hiding that fact from him/her.

However, if a person other than Barry Morphew* is charged with a crime against Suzanne, then the unlawful seizure wouldn't prevent the evidence from being introduced against that person, since the seizure of the home did not violate that person's constitutional rights.

* While it's true that the Morphew daughters would have standing to challenge the unlawful seizure because they live at the home, my understanding is that their Idaho alibis are iron-clad.

Can you give us a clue as to other cases where a longer search of a house led to evidence being suppressed?

I absolutely don't think this was an overly long search, during CoVid and in Colorado's mountains. But then, my family is from that area and I'd say everything is slower.

Besides, it's possibly that two things happened: Judge issued warrant AND BM, like John Ramsey, also signed paperwork to allow the search. Or gave verbal permission more or less to say "however long it takes."

Most people with missing spouses would say "however long it takes," if they thought it could help find their wives. I seriously doubt any judge is going to be upset if both of those things happened.

I have a very strong feeling that LE and the DA are in close touch with the Judge. Just a hunch. Based on years of working in the legal systems of the Western U.S. Especially more recently - everyone is very concerned about proper and legal investigations.

At any rate, I've never heard of any cases where evidence gained via a search warrant was suppressed because it took over a week to obtain. I'd be very interested in knowing about cases where length of time of a search, alone, resulted in suppressed evidence.

We aren't allowed to sleuth the daughters, and I'm not sure what their situation has to do with evidence suppression.

Judges don't have to ask the household members' permission before signing a search warrant, do they? In this case, I do believe LE probably asked the remaining Morphews, especially on that first evening. But to collect all the evidence needed, from everyone's phones and computers.

I suspect that initially, most people asked voluntarily shared their phone data about Suzanne's whereabouts on the day she went missing.

 

[BeckyF]

In nearly 20 years of legal practice, I've never heard of police barring entry to a homeowner for 10 days in order to secure a warrant. In fact, constitutional rights -- such as the 4th Amendment right against unreasonable seizures -- are even more important important in such situations because authorities tend to demand more conformance during times of danger.

So you’re saying LE violated his constitutional rights by denying him access to the home? If so, can the entire search warrant be challenged in a court proceeding? TIA

 

[Kimmer]

If memory serves me, wasn't it the family that found the bike and not LE? that is ine reason I think the bike is a non starter. LE syill has not even said what color her bike (the red herring) is.I have thought from the beginning of you have a wife/mother who has battled cancer twice and is living during a pandamic. I would be concerned that she was down somewhere in the house. even if she had said she might take a bike ride I would have wanted the neighbor to call in a welfare check and wait for LE to arrive and give them access to the house to make sure she is not in the middle of a medical emergency that she may be able to be helped with.

 

[Seattle1]

So you’re saying LE violated his constitutional rights by denying him access to the home? If so, can the entire search warrant be challenged in a court proceeding? TIA

The time in question is the alleged denied access by LE for 10 days prior to the search warrant issued. (BM could have consented to stay away from the home assist LE with the investigation).

There's nothing wrong with LE taking custody of the home once the warrant in hand as they had the legal authority to do so. I see no challenge to the entire search warrant in a court proceeding. MOO

 

[Seattle1]

If memory serves me, wasn't it the family that found the bike and not LE? that is ine reason I think the bike is a non starter. LE syill has not even said what color her bike (the red herring) is.I have thought from the beginning of you have a wife/mother who has battled cancer twice and is living during a pandamic. I would be concerned that she was down somewhere in the house. even if she had said she might take a bike ride I would have wanted the neighbor to call in a welfare check and wait for LE to arrive and give them access to the house to make sure she is not in the middle of a medical emergency that she may be able to be helped with.

It was the family (TN) that told media that the bike was recovered on the date that SM went missing. He did not say who located the bike. LE has never confirmed the bike was found or that it was missing or that SM even rode the bike on May 10.