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

Status
Not open for further replies.

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,497
Reaction score
24,193
As part of the motive, agreed, but given the manner of death and staging, anger and hatred toward both as well. This was not purely financial.
If the manner of death and staging made it obvious they were killed with anger and hatred, I would think police may have presumed right away that the couple were murdered. But we are led to believe there was something at the crimescene trying to be so convincing as to lead police instead in the direction of a murder/suicide determination (whether or not police actually fell for that). So therefore, if the killer(s) staged it to appear as M/S, it could very well have been purely financial (with a stick or two of mental illness thrown in). imo.
 

WINDSOR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
1,353
Reaction score
3,333
If the manner of death and staging made it obvious they were killed with anger and hatred, I would think police may have presumed right away that the couple were murdered. But we are led to believe there was something at the crimescene trying to be so convincing as to lead police instead in the direction of a murder/suicide determination (whether or not police actually fell for that). So therefore, if the killer(s) staged it to appear as M/S, it could very well have been purely financial (with a stick or two of mental illness thrown in). imo.

I believe the consideration, initially of M/S, was based on
a) no sign of forced entry,
b) nothing obviously missing or stolen,
c) no sign of struggle or mayhem,
d) not that unusual for older people create M/S pact,
e) bodies found together.

Looking at the above scenario, it would not be unusual for a seasoned investigator to consider M/S as a possible or even likely.
 

MistyWaters

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
10,113
Reaction score
52,325
As part of the motive, agreed, but given the manner of death and staging, anger and hatred toward both as well. This was not purely financial.

I don’t believe the motive was purely financial gain either.

If in fact a beneficiary is the murderer, I’d imagine they’d support a m/s scenario, as opposed to a double murder and resulting investigation by LE, especially after going to the effort of staging the deaths that way. Estate disbursements take place regardless of the cause and manner of death. But the stigma of m/s is everlasting.
 
Last edited:

nuff

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2017
Messages
483
Reaction score
1,570
I don’t believe the motive was purely financial gain either.

If in fact a beneficiary is the murderer, I’d imagine they’d support a m/s scenario, as opposed to a double murder and resulting investigation by LE, especially after going to the effort of staging the deaths that way. Estate disbursements take place regardless of the cause and manner of death. But the stigma of m/s is everlasting.
Unless, of course, they hoped the m/s explanation would persist until they realized others close to them strongly opposed it, and conceded only to protect themselves.
 

Bobbi Pearl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2021
Messages
252
Reaction score
1,030
If the manner of death and staging made it obvious they were killed with anger and hatred, I would think police may have presumed right away that the couple were murdered. But we are led to believe there was something at the crimescene trying to be so convincing as to lead police instead in the direction of a murder/suicide determination (whether or not police actually fell for that). So therefore, if the killer(s) staged it to appear as M/S, it could very well have been purely financial (with a stick or two of mental illness thrown in). imo.

I am still not convinced that TPS was not misquoted and never corrected the media, or they intentionally wanted an M/S dynamic floated to see what details stirred up. But if it was a ruse, that would be a quick assumption made by the detectives as M/S was brought up in the first few days ( not sure of the exact date or by who) either detectives have some very damaging evidence and know who they wanted to watch from the get-go or they just never corrected the narrative.

TPS are not a bunch of stupid people, they are trained experts in specific fields of LE and they had a contentious relationship with the media around this time (The Chief often came off as defensive and uncooperative to media enquiries) , they were under a lot of pressure on many crimes in the GTA that had still not been solved. No TPS updates to the public on the possibility of a serial killer in Toronto, if we recall they said no the missing men were not related and no serial killer was on the loose in GTA. People have opinion that homicide was brought in to prove M/S they did this by checking the roof, checking sewers on the street, searching the entire home. Yes these searches could be used to rule out an intruder or they could have been following a lead they garnered from within. Either way, I doubt any detective would be offering any interviews, comments and or details to the media, they were still in observation mode.

Historically, TPS (and other Regional Police Services) share very few details on any case, they always hold all cards close to the chest and act like they have a secret. We only find out if it hits the courts. Look at the horrific case of Christine Jessop, they finally named the culprit, he is dead but DNA confirmed it was him. Very few details about him or his crime have been updated or released since and they have closed the case. I know of 2 other cases where LE are 99.9% sure who the culprit is but do not have a body thus no DNA to use to prove it. One of those suspects is dead and the case file remains open.

Bobbi Pearl
 

Satchie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
5,388
Reaction score
26,509
I'm not sure anyone here can speak to this half-intelligently, but here is my question. The couple had been married for.. what? 45 years or something? And when they became married, they were of modest means. They had to take out loans from their family to get into business. Due to Barry's intelligence, risk-taking, hard work, whatever, he was able to grow that business and become a multi-billionaire.

In Canada we have family laws which, if I'm not mistaken, entitle the spouse to half of everything that grew during the marriage together.. so therefore, even though it may have been 'Barry's business', and it was Barry who worked in the business day-to-day, Honey is deemed to have contributed as well, and as far as I understand it, she would be entitled to half of everything.. after taxes and such. If H had divorced B, wouldn't B have had to cough up piles and piles of money to give her her 'half'? If most of the wealth was in Apo, and the value was so high, I'm assuming B would've been in a position where he would have to sell at least parts of it, in order to pay her out, if she demanded the monies, rather than the 'ownership'?

If someone is wealthy before they marry, it is perhaps common to have a prenup signed so that anything owned before the marriage, is not to be divided in a divorce, but everything gained after the marriage would be subject to sharing. That doesn't appear to have been the situation with B and H, as both of them were of relatively the same financial status at the time of marriage and neither seem to have come from wealthy parents themselves.

So what would happen if only H had been murdered? And in her Will, she left everything she owned to charity and her sibling? On paper, it might appear she only perhaps owned the property where their new home was being built, possibly she had some life insurance and a bit of cash, maybe a condo or two. In reality according to family law however, she owned half of everything. So how would her estate be distributed to her inheritors? Wouldn't that mean things would need to be sold in order to get the monies out, so they could be distributed as per her Will? And B would be left with his entire half, which is no small amount, but perhaps not enough to keep Apo going?

So if only H had been killed and the motive was to collect an inheritance, the starting point would be only half of their fortune, and then divided amongst whomever she bequeathed her wealth to? And same for if only B had been killed.

What if B had been killed for same reason, and he had only left monies for H to be looked after, with the rest going to his 4 children? What if H had an issue with that, and instead, wanted the cash? Couldn't she contest the Will to get 'her half' of the Sherman wealth? IF the couple were killed for their wealth, which seems it could be likely considering the substantial size of it, it only makes sense to me that both of them would need to go, in order to avoid all of that mess if only one were to die. It would take years to sort out in court, otherwise, imho.

Note that of course I am not versed in corporate law, taxation and loopholes for the wealthy, wealth, trust funds, and etc., nor an expert in family law, but I imagine that if during the course of the couple's 45 year marriage, B had been trying to work things so that H would be entitled to little, either if she divorced him, or if he or she died, H may have had an issue with that and took steps to stop it from happening, or.. perhaps that is what our laws are for, to stop that type of thing from happening even if the spouse is completely clueless about it?
I'm not up on this stuff either but it seems to me any beneficiaries to BS get shares in Apotex Holdings, from which they get a portion of the generated income. I think that's the purpose of creating a shareholding company, you don't have to break up or sell the business. If one of the shareholders wants the capital, they sell their portion of the shares. There are also family trusts which allow family members to do various things without huge tax losses.

Because if, as you described, BS had to sell off his 4 billion assets to give 1/2 to Honey, Mr. Taxman would get who knows how much: whatever the income tax rate is on $4 billion...
 

MistyWaters

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
10,113
Reaction score
52,325
Unless, of course, they hoped the m/s explanation would persist until they realized others close to them strongly opposed it, and conceded only to protect themselves.

Perhaps but while we only read about it I can’t begin to imagine the act of hands-on strangulation, then moving and positioning both dead bodies into a satisfactory pose. That’s terribly gruesome, far more diabolical than a quick murder with the end goal of death occurring.

I think by the positioning the killer was fulfilling a fantasy embedded deeply in their mind.
 

MistyWaters

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
10,113
Reaction score
52,325
If the manner of death and staging made it obvious they were killed with anger and hatred, I would think police may have presumed right away that the couple were murdered. But we are led to believe there was something at the crimescene trying to be so convincing as to lead police instead in the direction of a murder/suicide determination (whether or not police actually fell for that). So therefore, if the killer(s) staged it to appear as M/S, it could very well have been purely financial (with a stick or two of mental illness thrown in). imo.

Yes if so, I’d think definitely a stick or two of mental illness would be thrown in. Hatred too. Given an option of posing bodies, who in their right mind would wish for the final memories of close family members to become that of the husband murdering his wife, then taking his own life? It’s no picnic in the park for families to get beyond a suicide, let alone domestic violence/murder.

The alternative of a staged home invasion, the sudden death at the hands of a violent thief robbing a home, does not tarnish the reputation of the innocent victims. It’s viewed as a tragedy.

The intentional posing of the bodies in the way they were found was just as significant as the killing of the victims IMO.
 
Last edited:

ThaiBali

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2014
Messages
278
Reaction score
571
So true Honey's will would be in her legal name!

4 thoughts come to mind.

1. Maybe the media cannot find anyone to confirm they have a will for HS so they make a headline that it is missing.
2. The perp(s) removed her copy of her will, in case it could be determined she passed before Barry and it would be now Honey's executor in charge, not Barry's.
3. Maybe Honey removed people from her will as she added a grandson
4. You would hope and think that if a lawyer had drawn up a will 3 weeks before a murder that has been highly reported on that it is rumored she had one but it could not be found, that they would contact a family member, the police or the investigation teams. Not to mention the cosigner of her will should have the notion to contact someone. - Maybe that is what the article was for, to get them to call someone?

oops another thought came to mind while typing #4:
Maybe KD is working more closely with the police than the public is to know, maybe they work with him on what to put out to the public, either to keep us distracted or to see what actions/recations the news unleashes on people of interest.

Bobbi Pearl

I'm going for #2. I believe this was an inside job and that Honey was the main target hence her injuries which I believe were related to this Will.

I see Honey being taken to the main bedroom to find the Will and this is where the belt was taken from. The house keeper noted the bed ruffled and it was not how Honey would make it.

It was common knowledge that JS and Honey did not get along at all. JMO
 

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,497
Reaction score
24,193
I am still not convinced that TPS was not misquoted and never corrected the media, or they intentionally wanted an M/S dynamic floated to see what details stirred up. But if it was a ruse, that would be a quick assumption made by the detectives as M/S was brought up in the first few days ( not sure of the exact date or by who) either detectives have some very damaging evidence and know who they wanted to watch from the get-go or they just never corrected the narrative.
RSBM

On the very first day, the day the bodies were found, TPS went publicly on TV saying 'no outstanding suspects'. That suggests they already had in custody any suspects. This was reinforced a few times over the next days. I agree that TPS is certainly not stupid, and they had hoards of police working on this case. Plus the case was transferred to Homicide within hours. For whatever reason however, they may have wanted the public (and the killer(s)) to think TPS thought it was M/S for a full 6 weeks. There had to have been something super convincing at the scene that it was M/S, or they wanted the killer(s) to think the staging worked and that TPS thought M/S. moo.
 

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,497
Reaction score
24,193
...Given an option of posing bodies, who in their right mind would wish for the final memories of close family members to become that of the husband murdering his wife, then taking his own life?...
RSBM
Perhaps nobody in their 'right' mind, but perhaps someone who desperately wanted police to believe it was M/S might wish for that scenario, as opposed to an outright horrible murder that would then be fully investigated. It would've been so simple if police truly believed and went on to believe that there actually were 'no outstanding suspects'. That may have been what the killer(s) had been counting on. imo.
 

Tobiano8th

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2019
Messages
397
Reaction score
969
I saw reference to TStar Donovan article that lead homicide detective didn't go to crime site for first 4 days

Assuming I interpreted headline (article behind pay wall) correctly, suggests TPS jumped to erroneous conclusion and not some genius swerve to trap murderer
 

MistyWaters

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
10,113
Reaction score
52,325
RSBM

On the very first day, the day the bodies were found, TPS went publicly on TV saying 'no outstanding suspects'. That suggests they already had in custody any suspects. This was reinforced a few times over the next days. I agree that TPS is certainly not stupid, and they had hoards of police working on this case. Plus the case was transferred to Homicide within hours. For whatever reason however, they may have wanted the public (and the killer(s)) to think TPS thought it was M/S for a full 6 weeks. There had to have been something super convincing at the scene that it was M/S, or they wanted the killer(s) to think the staging worked and that TPS thought M/S. moo.

No outstanding suspects typically means they’re not seeking anyone...as opposed to “police are seeking Joe Blow in regard to....”.
How could TPS be seeking anyone, no way would they’ve known for sure it was a murder at first glance let alone whom to question.

Regardless, I agree, either something other than the bodies led somebody at TPS to believe it was m/s - or because the deaths appeared that way, they just went with the flow and allowed the rumours to flourish until the full autopsies were conducted and medical evidence became known.

But either way, the unnamed leak wasn’t an official TPS press release so we don’t know what TPS believed. Some officers may’ve saw it one way initially, others were of the opposite opinion. Regarding the recent Nova Scotia spree shootings, initial media reports from “police sources” were incorrect as well. The rush to be first out of the gate with breaking news is always how it goes.
 
Last edited:

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,497
Reaction score
24,193
No outstanding suspects typically means they’re not seeking anyone...as opposed to “police are seeking Joe Blow in regard to....”.
How could TPS be seeking anyone, no way would they’ve known for sure it was a murder at first glance let alone whom to question.

Regardless, I agree, either something other than the bodies led somebody at TPS to believe it was m/s - or because the deaths appeared that way, they just went with the flow and allowed the rumours to flourish until the full autopsies were conducted and medical evidence became known.

But either way, the unnamed leak wasn’t an official TPS press release so we don’t know what TPS believed. Some officers may’ve saw it one way initially, others were of the opposite opinion. Regarding the recent Nova Scotia spree shootings, initial media reports from “police sources” were incorrect as well. The rush to be first out of the gate with breaking news is always how it goes.
From what others who saw the scene have said, they thought it looked like murder right away. And although they had no press release stating whatever an officer told reporters, since he/she said it off the record, we do know TPS went publicly on television to state 'there were no outstanding suspects'. I have never heard that said in a case where they're not sure yet whether it was murder. I have heard it said however, when there are two deaths in a home and they're quite certain one of the victims killed the other and then themselves. I think *that* is what started and allowed the rumours to flourish.... for whatever reason, whether they actually thought that, or they wanted someone to think they thought that.

I think reporters report what they hear and see, etc. We are not present, but they are, and so they write about what's going on. I don't think any of them ever say they guarantee it's 100% accurate, and usually cases are changing as new information unfolds, etc. I think it is human nature for people to talk about a mysterious event, and also for people to want to hear about unusual occurrences, etc. Can't blame reporters for everything. imo.
 

ldlager

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
1,696
Reaction score
6,487
I'm not up on this stuff either but it seems to me any beneficiaries to BS get shares in Apotex Holdings, from which they get a portion of the generated income. I think that's the purpose of creating a shareholding company, you don't have to break up or sell the business. If one of the shareholders wants the capital, they sell their portion of the shares. There are also family trusts which allow family members to do various things without huge tax losses.

Because if, as you described, BS had to sell off his 4 billion assets to give 1/2 to Honey, Mr. Taxman would get who knows how much: whatever the income tax rate is on $4 billion...

I believe the shares of Apo were held in a trust, which could specifically protect against the “asset splitting” that you describe in a divorce, death, etc. Moo
 

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,497
Reaction score
24,193
I saw reference to TStar Donovan article that lead homicide detective didn't go to crime site for first 4 days

Assuming I interpreted headline (article behind pay wall) correctly, suggests TPS jumped to erroneous conclusion and not some genius swerve to trap murderer
True. But also just as hard to believe, is that TPS could actually be so incompetent in so many ways as has been laid out over the past 3.25 years. Gomes sent an underling (Price) to the scene, instead of going herself. The article is here too, hopefully you are able to access it here:

PressReader.com - Your favorite newspapers and magazines.
 

MistyWaters

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
10,113
Reaction score
52,325
True. But also just as hard to believe, is that TPS could actually be so incompetent in so many ways as has been laid out over the past 3.25 years. Gomes sent an underling (Price) to the scene, instead of going herself. The article is here too, hopefully you are able to access it here:

PressReader.com - Your favorite newspapers and magazines.

How would Gomes have the ability to see into the future in order to know she was going to become lead detective? It’s impossible to state Gomes sent Price prior to her being appointed lead. Maybe Price was going to take charge and as the case grew in complexity Gomes was appointed lead? We just don’t know.

Surely we’re not expecting the TPS to step up and explain themselves every time criticism driven by the media surfaces involving this case. Do people of Toronto really believe TPS is that incompetent or is it a case of believing one-sided biased media stories?
 
Last edited:

al66pine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
7,476
Reaction score
27,011
Ontario. Filing Will w Probate Court? Anyone?
In Ontario, if a lawyer knows a person is deceased, and if an executor doesn't show up at the lawyers to collect the original will, does the lawyer have a legal obligation to contact the executor or somehow submit the Will to the court/equivalent?
bbm @ldlager bbm That's what my post just preceding yours was asking about. My understanding is --- (at least in some US states), an atty/law firm holding the original will, learning of that client-testator's death, is obligated to file that will w the probate court Within a certain period, such as 30 days. I wondered if Ontario atty's are required to do the same.

W a quickie search re Ontario, I did not find an answer and hoped one of our knowledgeable posters from the Great White North could ring in here.
 

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,497
Reaction score
24,193
How would Gomes have the ability to see into the future in order to know she was going to become lead detective? It’s impossible to state Gomes sent Price prior to her being appointed lead. Maybe Price was going to take charge and as the case grew in complexity Gomes was appointed lead? We just don’t know.

Surely we’re not expecting the TPS to step up and explain themselves every time criticism driven by the media surfaces involving this case. Do people of Toronto really believe TPS is that incompetent or is it a case of believing one-sided biased media stories?
From what I read, I understood that Gomes simply got the luck of the draw on the Sherman case, and already *was* the lead detective on the Sherman case - she didn't need to be psychic. Not so impossible to believe Gomes sent Price when TPS wrote it themelves, imo. My own thought is - too bad choices aren't made by TPS based on type or complexity of case.

From article quoted above. PressReader.com - Your favorite newspapers and magazines. :

"Each team typically has eight officers of different ranks, led by a detective sergeant. There is no favouritism or choice made depending on the type or complexity of case. The team that is “up” (available) gets the assignment. On that Friday afternoon, Det.-Sgt. Susan Gomes’ team was “up” and they were given the Sherman assignment. .... At no time that day did Det.-Sgt. Gomes, the lead homicide investigator, go to the crime scene while the bodies were there, Toronto Police have confirmed. [my note: the bodies left the scene the same evening of the day they were found.]

Instead of going herself, Gomes delegated a junior homicide officer on her team, Det. Brandon Price, to attend. .... “Inspector Gomes had complete confidence in her partner (Price) to take on this task as they continued to work seamlessly together on the case,” according to a statement provided to the Star by Toronto Police spokesperson Meaghan Gray. Price gave a short press briefing that evening outside Old Colony Road, telling reporters there was no sign of forced entry and police were not looking for an “outstanding suspect.” ...

“It was Detective Sergeant Brandon Price (Price’s rank was detective at the time, he has since been promoted) who was tasked by Inspector Gomes (who was also later promoted) with attending the Sherman home in the hours/days immediately following the discovery of the bodies...,” Gray said."
 

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,497
Reaction score
24,193
Also interesting is that it was Price, the underling who attended the scene instead of the lead detective on the case, who announced publicly on day#1 that there was 'no outstanding suspect(s)'. Meanwhile, according to Joe Warmington, Gomes said this at the time of the January 26, 2018 press conference:

“I believe they (Shermans) were targeted,” said Gomes, who added it was never her view that it was a murder-suicide.

WARMINGTON: Did cops mislead, bungle or capitulate in Sherman 'murder' probe? | Toronto Sun
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top