Found Deceased CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #36

[MassGuy]

With regards to the burying at the beach site...

Does anyone else think this doesn't make any sense?

Even I, with no knowledge other than what I've read in the news etc., know that rivers and beaches change with the season and flow of water.

At the edge of flowing water would be the last place I'd bury someone.

Then again I'm not a murderer, but still...

I think it’s a moot point anyways. If she was buried there, I’m convinced she would have been discovered during that 3 day search.

And I agree, it doesn’t make a hell of a lot of sense to begin with.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I’m not sure we have any more true evidence against BM than we did from the first weeks, further the timeline seems to be tightening so that it’s possible BM has been ruled out thru the paper and digital info.
I do have other suspects, but since we can’t sleuth here...I refuse to keep BM as #1...actually, I crossed him off long ago...
I can’t post my list here, of course, but my proposed POIs have more motivation, and opportunity than BM, JMVHO
I just wonder which ones have been vetted and crossed off by LE.

Interesting at least, because my poi also wasn't BM at the beginning. But now, meanwhile, he has done and said so much incomprehensible things and has shown so little mourning, that he IS on my poi list (which honestly has no other pois at this time, only a uncertain feeling, whether there should be more pois on it).
May I ask, if on your poi list is someone, whose life Suzanne would have saved with her disappearing and who is worth it in Suzanne's eyes? May I ask also about "motive", which someone other would have had and Barry has not?

 

[MadTing]

I would love to hear me info on the wall that required repair because i am struggling to understand why a bobcat would even be needed to repair a wall small enough that the job could have been completed by 2 people as he proposed he and MG were to do the job themselves in the past. My understanding is the wall was already up but it was just wonky, that tells me the foundations were already in place and the brick work simply needed redoing, Why he would need to be doing a "mechanical thing" to his bobcat if it wasn't even needed that day and the job was organized in a last minuet rush there would be no time to do any unnecessary mechanical things on machines you didn't need that day.

 

[lamlawindy]

It all depends on the resources of the department. The agencies I've worked with the most are bigger than Salida/CCSO and there are times when either the IT positions are empty or filled by people just starting out.

There are entire jurisdictions in the West where courthouses and sheriffs run much more as they did in 1950.

It's entirely possible, but budget has been an issue - and I'll bet you a latte that they didn't have such a person on staff.

Oh, I'm sure they don't have a dedicated IT department. CCSO probably is supported by Chaffee County's IT department.

That being said, it wouldn't be difficult to find somebody -- either a CCSO employee or even a county employee -- who can put together a form link wherein video files can be uploaded. Even a civilian could be deputized by the sheriff to perform this particular act, if necessary, from my reading of CO Rev Stat § 30-10-506.

 

[lamlawindy]

If Barry Morphew is ever charged with an offence, not only will his attorneys have plenty to work with so will the DA According to TOS, we the members are not allowed to sleuth BM or his associates. The DA will have no such restraint and will be able to expose BM for the sack of dirt husband he was. Not to mention the sack of dirt employer he was/is! JMHO

Actually, the DA will be restrained by the Rules of Evidence. First, whether or not Barry is a bad employer has no bearing on whether he committed a crime against Suzanne, so this type of evidence would draw a relevancy objection on the part of his attorney.* Moreover, Rule 404(b) should keep out any prior bad acts -- if, indeed any exist -- from their marriage, unless those prior bad acts are being used by the State to show motive, plan, preparation, etc.

* Relevance" in a legal sense has a specific meaning under Rule 401: Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

 

[lamlawindy]

Here's the thing:

Unsavory characters tend to associate with other unsavory characters.

Jurors understand that.

JMO.

Even assuming that (a) unsavory characters tend to associate with other unsavory characters and (b) jurors understand that, it does not mean that jurors will automatically deem the "unsavory" witness as credible: in my experience with juries, it very much depends on the other evidence presented. From prior cases when I've spoken to juries after trials, other evidence provided often makes or breaks the credibility of an "unsavory" witness.

<modsnip>

 

[Ontario Mom]

Yes, it was first scheduled for April and then for May. BM apparently didn't mention anything to her about the wall job on Saturday. He saw JP on the same day but I can't remember if he mentioned the job to him or not. Either BM himself didn't find out they had to do the job on Monday until the last minute or he made the decision himself. One days notice seems pretty unusual.

According to LS' interview with JP, he saw BM Saturday afternoon in Salida, where he (BM) hired him to fix a wall in Broomfield. Direct quote from Lauren Scharf at roughly :40 in.
Suzanne Morphew’s husband left Denver hotel, contractor claims room was “reeking of chlorine” | FOX21 News Colorado

 

[Boxer]

BM might be more concerned about pictures and or text messages that show he was an unfaithful husband, than any messages that might implicate him for murder. If his “faithful husband image“ is believed by his daughters, BM would want to protect that image at all costs. JMO

That could be but MOO doubt MG would be saying what she is saying regarding no romantic involvement if her phone she turned over to police did have evidence of a relationship on it.

 

[Hoosierfan72]

I mean when is the last in person sighting of SM? Was it by the cleaning woman at the dumpster on Thursday evening?

I think its unlikely SM was killed on Friday, at least based on what we think we know. If she was dead on Friday, BM would have had to impersonate her when talking to her good friend about a wedding. BM doesn't strike me as someone who could pull that off (evidenced by, IMO, the strange activity on SMs account Sat evening, which I do believe was BM bungling his way through her social media). Keep in mind, too, LE surely has their phone activity and would be able to see if SM was active when BMs phone was elsewhere. I think something happened to SM when her conversation was interrupted, whenever that was (we believe 12:30 on Sat). MOO.

 

[Dave F.]

According to LS' interview with JP, he saw BM Saturday afternoon in Salida, where he (BM) hired him to fix a wall in Broomfield. Direct quote from Lauren Scharf at roughly :40 in.
Suzanne Morphew’s husband left Denver hotel, contractor claims room was “reeking of chlorine” | FOX21 News Colorado

I didn't find the video at that link, but the article at the link, which was co-written by Lauren Scharf and others, does state:
"Puckett mentioned he saw Barry in person on Saturday, May 9, and described the work he’d been hired to do, a project involving fixing a wall. "
IMO

 

[Ontario Mom]

According to MG, she was fired specificially because she turned over her phone to the CBI.

"She says she heard from Barry again, days after, through text. “He fired me because I gave up my phone, I wasn’t staying quiet and I was complying with CBI,” she said of that interaction." “I’m not the other woman”: Second contractor speaks out about Suzanne Morphew investigation | FOX21 News Colorado

I'd love to know what his text actually said, and more importantly, I'd love to know what was on her phone that would be so incriminating to BM that he actually sent two people to speak with her and attempt to persuade her into not turning it over. It could be a great number of unsavory things that he most certainly didn't want anyone to know about. Which obviously doesn't prove he killed anyone but it might go a long way to reveal a bit more about his character.

jmo

 

[MadTing]

I personally think there could be more things that are unfavorable to his character and or details from him setting up this job with the wall that contradict what he's already told LE on her phone rather than any evidence of them having any kind of affair. I don't believe he would use somebody he's had an affair with in the past as part of his alibi when his wife went missing.

I don't personally believe MG has ever had any kind of fling with him.

 

[Boxer]

Maybe BM did some complaining in text about SM to MG.
Complaining you have to go "keep the wife happy"
can be kind of a rude thing to say about your wife, depending how its said.

 

[MrsWatson]

I think whatever communication between MG & BM's phones shows things that contradict what BM has told LE. Or she has pictures of things he doesn't want revealed. Not necessarily involving her, but doing things that for whatever reasons, he doesn't want known. I have no idea what that might be, but I do believe there was something on MG's phone that was incriminating to him. I don't believe she was involved with him romantically at all. I also don't think she's revealed a even a wee portion of what she knows, about BM, his business, his movements and her interaction with him that week-end. I'm not in any way implying she has anything to do with it. Rather, just like JP, I think she was used as an alibi and knows that now.

MOO

 

[kkdj]

So if she was a subcontractor, technically she can’t be “fired”? he may have told her he wasn’t going to use her again, after the non working weekend. I’m not sure of technical terms, and I’m not sure if it matters.
I am pretty sure if I had a regularly used subcontractor unable to handle things during a crisis, I’d be looking for a more reliable one for future jobs. You bring valuable insight into these issues.
I’m not sure I would ever accept a disgruntled employee or subcontractor’s info as evidence without the proverbial grain of salt.
Reliability is key component in hiring process, sometimes beating out the bids, IME

Technically, in my state anyway, we can fire a sub. But we generally need to give written notice to correct the situation within so much time. It's a contract and protocol must be followed, unlike an employer/employee relationship.
Honestly tho, I get the feeling BM and MG didn't have an actual contract but rather a handshake, so to speak. So I guess he could just kick her off the job if he wanted.
But, I haven't heard why he "fired" her, except for speculation.

 

[susiQ]

Actually, the DA will be restrained by the Rules of Evidence. First, whether or not Barry is a bad employer has no bearing on whether he committed a crime against Suzanne, so this type of evidence would draw a relevancy objection on the part of his attorney.* Moreover, Rule 404(b) should keep out any prior bad acts -- if, indeed any exist -- from their marriage, unless those prior bad acts are being used by the State to show motive, plan, preparation, etc.

* Relevance" in a legal sense has a specific meaning under Rule 401: Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Pardon me, but any and all things pertaining to the way in which BM treated SM during their marriage, during her illness, the control he exhibited over her, her inheritance, and all other finances, who made the decision to cut off their landline are ALL indeed relevant to the DA and admissible. Whether or not his defence attorneys can have these inclusions overruled will be seen when/if the time comes.

Truth is, BM’s defence attorneys will be largely restrained in the same manner in which Patrick Frazee’s were restrained from mounting a defence. The utter stupidity of their client. The only difference is PF knew when to shut up

As always, JMHO.

 

[Feistyomi]

Interesting at least, because my poi also wasn't BM at the beginning. But now, meanwhile, he has done and said so much incomprehensible things and has shown so little mourning, that he IS on my poi list (which honestly has no other pois at this time, only a uncertain feeling, whether there should be more pois on it).
May I ask, if on your poi list is someone, whose life Suzanne would have saved with her disappearing and who is worth it in Suzanne's eyes? May I ask also about "motive", which someone other would have had and Barry has

We stopped looking for other suspects, once we named BM, imo...as to mourning, how is the process disrupted w/o a body?
I interpret his statement as part of the process, trying to find some solace in his anguish...
MOO, he has never been acting and covering up, he is a private person, now being scrutinized publicly, during the absolutely worst time of his life...

 

[oviedo]

I think it’s a moot point anyways. If she was buried there, I’m convinced she would have been discovered during that 3 day search.

And I agree, it doesn’t make a hell of a lot of sense to begin with.

Which takes me back to what were they sifting for in those three days?

 

[steeltowngirl]

Actually, the DA will be restrained by the Rules of Evidence. First, whether or not Barry is a bad employer has no bearing on whether he committed a crime against Suzanne, so this type of evidence would draw a relevancy objection on the part of his attorney.* Moreover, Rule 404(b) should keep out any prior bad acts -- if, indeed any exist -- from their marriage, unless those prior bad acts are being used by the State to show motive, plan, preparation, etc.

* Relevance" in a legal sense has a specific meaning under Rule 401: Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

RSBM:
“First, whether or not Barry is a bad employer has no bearing on whether he committed a crime against Suzanne”

I’m glad you said this. I’ve been confused by the discussion of the type of employer BM is, and whether the employees are independent contractors or not. Also about the legal remedies MG might take to get paid.

All of the above is interesting to read, but is it relevant to the case? It may be.. ? I’m just struggling to understand how. MOO

 

[oviedo]

According to MG, she was fired specificially because she turned over her phone to the CBI.

"She says she heard from Barry again, days after, through text. “He fired me because I gave up my phone, I wasn’t staying quiet and I was complying with CBI,” she said of that interaction." “I’m not the other woman”: Second contractor speaks out about Suzanne Morphew investigation | FOX21 News Colorado

I'd love to know what his text actually said, and more importantly, I'd love to know what was on her phone that would be so incriminating to BM that he actually sent two people to speak with her and attempt to persuade her into not turning it over. It could be a great number of unsavory things that he most certainly didn't want anyone to know about. Which obviously doesn't prove he killed anyone but it might go a long way to reveal a bit more about his character.

jmo

Wondering if Lauren has seen the text ? Maybe that will be in the next story ?

jmo