Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #12

Discussion in 'Crimes in the News' started by dotr, Dec 15, 2017.

  1. human

    human Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    23,140
    Likes Received:
    25,286
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When the perps are revealed in cases, it is amazing how much info LE has
     
  2. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    How much do they have when the perp isn't caught? Thats more applicable here.
     
  3. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Interesting article from the Washington Post here.

    The analysis underscores what police leaders and homicide experts have said about the passage of time working against detectives. But it also dispels the notion of a “48-hour rule” that most cases, if solved, are wrapped up in two days. Only 30 percent of the cases led to an arrest within that time frame, the analysis found. Two-thirds of arrests were made within one month. For cases that remained unsolved after one year, 5 percent ultimately led to an arrest.
     
    anonymess, watcher9, ldlager and 2 others like this.
  4. Kittybunny

    Kittybunny Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    4,279
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Wow, that's a depressing statistic for so many of the cases I follow here on WS. I predict that the 2-year anniversary will come and go with no resolution. That said, I still do believe this isn't a cold case, if only because of the time it must take to pull on all of the threads in the complex web of personal and business relationships and corporate dealings that surround it.
     
    kimpage, tarabull, Tripod and 7 others like this.
  5. Kittybunny

    Kittybunny Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    4,279
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Oops. Deleted.
     
  6. ldlager

    ldlager Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    2,897
    Trophy Points:
    93
    If there is no forced entry it doesn't mean the killers couldn't have accessed the house from the side or back doors. They could have picked the locks (Greenspan already indicated that LE didn't adequately check this, although I understand you don't believe Greenspan). Or the back or side doors were already unlocked (maybe purposefully left unlocked from a previous showing as an example). Or they went through the back yard and waited outside the front for Honey to arrive, hidden in bushes, behind the front wall outside the dining room, etc).
    Common sense tells me that the whole TPS isn't lying about the evidence that was derived in their investigation, and obtained in the autopsies.
    This was a double murder. If you doubt Greenspan, and disbelieve TPS then you are implying a massive coverup by numerous individuals, including police, the Mayor, the private investigators, and a respected lawyer . This makes no common sense IMO.
     
    nuff, Sphinx, human and 5 others like this.
  7. dotr

    dotr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    28,822
    Likes Received:
    30,886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The killer/s could also have just come to the door and were let in, imo, speculation.
    [​IMG]
    123RF.com
     
    FromGermany, Sphinx, Tripod and 9 others like this.
  8. ldlager

    ldlager Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    2,897
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Agreed. But I think the point was that the neighbour’s security camera would probably at least have picked up images of someone approaching the door or going up the driveway on the wed night. I think Mikos34 and perhaps rickcross believe that the cameras didn’t pick anyone going up to the house from the front, so therefore no one else was in the house except for the Sherman’s. Don’t mean to speak for them, that’s just what I think they are getting at.
     
    anonymess, Sphinx, neesaki and 2 others like this.
  9. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Its comments like this that prove my point.

    "Greenspan already indicated that LE didn't adequately check this"

    How does Greenspan know what TPS did? He is not privy to that information. With comments like this he is NOT trying to find out what actually happened, he is putting information out there to make the public believe there was an intruder, and letting TPS know that he will be claiming police incompetence from the start. Greenspan is simply a PR man, he was hired to rebuff any notion of murder/suicide and that is exactly what he's doing.

    As for TPS, I don't know where you get the idea that there is some sort of grand conspiracy. I suggest that there are only four people involved here, and that one of those people, the coroner, really was not in on it. I believe that his autopsy was inconclusive. I believe that Saunders had him attend the second autopsy because he new that Chaisson would cast even further doubt on his findings, because that was what he was being paid to do. So now you have indecisive coroner, pressured by an ex-veteran coroner to change his opinion. Now Saunders/Gomes/Price are free to call this whatever they feel like. So no huge conspiracy here. It has all worked as planned. Saunders, despite much criticism, had his contract extended for another year. Gomes and Price received nice promotions, regardless of the fact that they underperformed over the previous year.

    The Mayor? Unless he asked specifically for this resolution, he did nothing wrong. Even if he had, neither he or Saunders were ever going to admit it. But maybe that's why he felt the need to see Saunders face to face, as government calls are recorded? Who knows? Justin Trudeau pressured the Attorney General to do something illegal and fired her when she wouldn't play ball. Don't even try and suggest that politicians are beyond reproach.
     
    Kerry Winter and dotr like this.
  10. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    That is exactly what I am getting at. There is no forced entry, so and intruder needed to come in the front door, but there is a camera there that apparently didn't show anything. I know some will theorize that possibly there is video, but then why is TPS deviating from their normal procedure of showing at least part of the video to the public in the hopes that someone will recognize something? The fact that Greenspan is calling into question TPS's competence in checking locks is because he knows damned well that the surveillance tape shows nothing.
     
    dotr likes this.
  11. ldlager

    ldlager Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    2,897
    Trophy Points:
    93
    How does Greenspan know what TPS did? Do you not think that police officers and the private investigators ever talk? Of course they do, they are former coworkers, and they compare notes, I am quite sure. So I think Greenspan knows generally what LE did at the scene, based on what the private investigators were told by their friends still in the police force.

    I think Greenspan also knows at least some of what LE didn't do at the scene, based on whatever evidence the private investigators found once they were given access to the house. For instance, if hair or fiber evidence remained at the scene, it's because LE didn't collect it. For instance, he states that among other clues, LE missed over 25 fingerprints at the crime scene.
    Fingerprints, DNA not identified 10 months after Sherman murders: lawyer | Watch News Videos Online

    In the case of the door locks, lab analysis can determine if the locks were picked based on marking and scratches on the lock components. If the private investigators got to the house and found that the locks had not been removed for lab and scientific analysis, then they can reasonably conclude that LE did not adequately perform scientific analysis on the locks to determine if they had been picked. Here is his quote on the matter (RBBM):
    "...A thorough investigation of all points of entry into the home was not done or had missed a potentially key piece of information that could have helped police more quickly focus their investigation: a lock that may have been tampered with or forced"...

    I know you don't believe Greenspan, I accept that. But I see no logical reason for him to be complicit in such a coverup, and to lie about evidence that the private investigators say they found at the scene (which by the way was subsequently turned over to LE for analysis and investigation).
     
    Kittybunny and dotr like this.
  12. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    How does Greenspan know what TPS did? Do you not think that police officers and the private investigators ever talk? Of course they do, they are former coworkers, and they compare notes, I am quite sure. So I think Greenspan knows generally what LE did at the scene, based on what the private investigators were told by their friends still in the police force.

    Fair enough.

    I think Greenspan also knows at least some of what LE didn't do at the scene, based on whatever evidence the private investigators found once they were given access to the house. For instance, if hair or fiber evidence remained at the scene, it's because LE didn't collect it. For instance, he states that among other clues, LE missed over 25 fingerprints at the crime scene.
    Fingerprints, DNA not identified 10 months after Sherman murders: lawyer | Watch News Videos Online

    Greenspan is just being moronic here, trying to create distrust with TPS. When investigators check a house for prints, they obviously cannot dust every square inch of the house. The focus on areas where the liklihood of a perp leaving a print is the greatest. I could go in to any home involved in a crime and find fingerprints that weren't collected, like on the stove or fridge. But what are the odds that an intruder made a sandwich? This is a smokescreen plain and simple. Remember, Greenspan is not there to prove there was an intruder, just to plant a seed of doubt that one might have been there, which is a very easy thing to accomplish.

    In the case of the door locks, lab analysis can determine if the locks were picked based on marking and scratches on the lock components. If the private investigators got to the house and found that the locks had not been removed for lab and scientific analysis, then they can reasonably conclude that LE did not adequately perform scientific analysis on the locks to determine if they had been picked. Here is his quote on the matter (RBBM):
    "...A thorough investigation of all points of entry into the home was not done or had missed a potentially key piece of information that could have helped police more quickly focus their investigation: a lock that may have been tampered with or forced"...

    So obviously Greenspan removed the locks and had them independently tested right? Let me know when you here the results of that. In all liklihood TPS examined all doors very carefully and deemed the likelihood of tampering as non existent. Again, smoke and mirrors.

    I know you don't believe Greenspan, I accept that. But I see no logical reason for him to be complicit in such a coverup, and to lie about evidence that the private investigators say they found at the scene (which by the way was subsequently turned over to LE for analysis and investigation).

    Who said he was lying or covering anything up? He is using non critical evidence to give the media the impression that TPS did an incompetent job of investigating. Kind of like going in to the house and finding a spec of dust and say that tis could be DNA from an intruder and that TPS erred in not collecting it. Greenspan is doing nothing illegal, he's just being slimy in the way he is forcing the direction of the investigation, according to his clients wishes.
     
    anonymess and dotr like this.
  13. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    And lets talk about the family. Originally outraged at the direction of the investigation they assemble a high priced team to debunk what LE is proposing. Their guy, Greenspan, has been nothing but critical of how TPS have handled the case. But here we are, nearly two years later and the family is absolutely quiet. They seem to have absolutely no interest in this case being solved. Or just possibly, they know it already has been solved.
     
  14. ldlager

    ldlager Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    2,897
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Wow.

    The Gomes press conference announcing the double murder was held on was on January 26, 2018.
    The Greenspan press conference, in which he highlighted apparent shortcomings in LE's investigation, took place ten months later, in October 2018.

    I believe your position is that the family knows this was a M/S or a S/S, but wants everyone to believe it was a M/M.
    By late January 2018, the family already got what you say they wanted- a M/M finding and public announcement. So if the police already believed it was a M/M in January 2018, then why would the family have Greenspan stand up, ten months after that date, and criticize LE's handling of the investigation? Wouldn't that possibly throw into question the conclusion reached by LE?
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2019
  15. casesensitive

    casesensitive Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    4,085
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Excellent point on timing Idlager.
    I have always suspected that TPS totally resented the family's private investigation team for obvious reasons. I doubt that TPS has been cooperative, in any way, with them from the beginning. This feud, with no end in sight, could have prompted Greenspan to go public in attacking their investigation. There was no relationship to salvage. jmo
     
  16. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    As I recall, Greenspans team was responsible for the front page articles in every Toronto paper, declaring this a double murder and criticizing police well before Gomes gave her press conference.

    As for the press conference in October, I honestly think that was done to quell the public opinion that it was odd that the family had been so silent and had offered no reward. I think it worked like a charm, don't you?

    Lastly, I just wanted to add that you seem to think that everybody involved is in on this conspiracy. It is quite possible that the family wants to believe, rightly or wrongly, that this was in fact a double murder. This would also explain why the October presser took place, despite the fact that they'd already gotten the decision they wanted. What you have to ask yourself is why we haven't heard a peep since then? If the family was committed to finding these supposed killer(s), wouldn't the most effective way to do it be by keeping the story in the news with monthly press conferences/status updates? Instead they spend their time own court, keeping information secret, and demolishing their parents home. I've said it before, nothing about this case seems "normal", not LE's behaviour and certainly not the family's behaviour.
     
    anonymess, ldlager and dotr like this.
  17. WINDSOR

    WINDSOR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    847
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    Trophy Points:
    93
    As for the press conference in October, I honestly think that was done to quell the public opinion that it was odd that the family had been so silent and had offered no reward. I think it worked like a charm, don't you?

    " The family of Honey and Barry Sherman is offering a reward of up to $10 million for information that leads to the arrest and prosecution of suspects in the deaths of the billionaire couple, whose bodies were found in their mansion last December". Oct 26, 2018 cbc.ca

    rickcross, Is your point that no reward was offered by the family; or no reward was offered by the family until after the press conference, implying the TPS shamed the family into offering a reward?
     
    anonymess, ldlager and dotr like this.
  18. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    No, I think the family were swayed by public opinion. I feel that TPS was well on its way to letting the case die by that point. Chief Saunders had good reason to be pissed IMO. Either the family felt that the reward might help find the killer, or the simply thought it was good PR. The unprecedented amount leads me to believe the latter is probably true. After all, if someone is willing to come forward with info, they likely would do it for a million dollars. Ten million is overkill, but it does het headlines and it does leave the impression that this is important to the family. If they knew this money would never be claimed, it really makes no difference does it?
     
  19. ldlager

    ldlager Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    2,897
    Trophy Points:
    93
    To be clear, I dont think there is a conspiracy at all. I think they were murdered. But if there is a conspiracy, surely the family must be involved- otherwise who else benefits from it? Not Greenspan, not LE, only the family.

    In the early days of this case I made many posts supporting a M/S. i explained in detail how Barry could have done it and staged everything (although I’m no expert in this area to be clear) . I even explained how Barry could have put restraint markings on both their wrists. I took a lot of heat for those postings at the time, but that’s ok, WS is about sleuthing and debate.
    What made me change my mind was the second autopsy evidently concluding that something OTHER than the belts strangled them both. There is no way Barry could have staged that without help. So at that point I chose to believe LE that this was a double murder.
    That apparent finding, that the belts didn’t kill them, is the key IMO to this being declared a double murder.
    If you choose not to believe the autopsy, then a m/s or s/s is possible. But I have no reason to doubt what was announced by LE and Greenspan.
    I respect your thoughts and views, and understand where you are coming from. There are many unexplained and incongruous things in this case to be sure. I just choose to believe the police in this instance ( and that certainly is NOT usually an automatic for me!).
     
    anonymess, Kasmeer, WINDSOR and 5 others like this.
  20. rickcross

    rickcross Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    Trophy Points:
    93
    So basically you are saying that you only believe its double murder based on the findings of a pathologist that was hired to refute the idea of a murder/suicide? You are way more trusting than I am. Quite frankly, if the family doesn't start screaming and hiring experts, this case would have been closed as a M/S pretty quickly. So, either TPS is incompetent and got it wrong, or TPS let themselves be influenced by an outside party with an agenda. Both scenarios are more than a little disturbing if you ask me.
     
    anonymess and Kerry Winter like this.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice