Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #6

[Crosby87]

It says cannot be viewed outside of Canada.

Can you watch episodes on The Fifth Estate?

 

[Crosby87]

It's now 9:00 in Nova Scotia and it's on.

I didn't find a live stream, but the programs are posted here after they air: http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/m/whentowatch/

ETA: The episode is now at the link above.

Thank you for letting us know the Fifth Estate is airing an episode called the Sherman murders. My TV broke down so I'm glad I can watch it online.

I lwent to The Fifth Estates website and noticed there is an episode on “Driving High: Is the test for Weed reliable?” I’m glad this topic was discussed before Canadians are legally able to purchase marijuana on Canada Day, July 1st. Although the commercials on television frighten Canadians into believing the test for Weed IS reliable, based on what I’ve read in several media reports, it’s not. According to the Fifth Estate investigator, the test is based more on guesswork than it is on solid science. The episode begins with the cops arresting a woman who says she doesn’t smoke marijuana lol.

I enjoyed watching videos of Honey's dancing lessons and of her performance.

 

[Snoopster]

During the lie detector segment, where KW failed the test when he said that BS asked him to hire someone to kill Honey...

"that could have been an embellishment"
When asked why he (KW) lied.
"I'm completely baffled."

Even Kw admitted that he had the motive....but he denies that he did it.

Would he agree to take a lie detector test to determine if HE had killed BS? "No."

He agreed that he had fantasized about killing BS.

 

[Lexiintoronto]

It says cannot be viewed outside of Canada.

Does this work?
[video]https://youtu.be/ov7SCivAo5A[/video][video=youtube;ov7SCivAo5A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov7SCivAo5A&t=22s[/video]

 

[Bravo]

Thank You Mr. Criminologist for supporting my belief. This was personal and a rage killing.
ETA-not seen in a Prof. hit for obv. reasons

 

[BUF]

Does this work?
[video]https://youtu.be/ov7SCivAo5A[/video][video=youtube;ov7SCivAo5A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov7SCivAo5A&t=22s[/video]

Thank you Lexi...works great!

 

[Snoopster]

Dr Arntfield says the murder was personal. He said that the fact that LE said "targeted" does not mean that it was a professional hit.

And now D'Angelo is saying it was personal as well. (ETA: take that as you may.)

 

[Snoopster]

OK... perhaps a bit of a jab by Fifth Estate...they said "...the billions they earned and the 10's of millions that they gave away..."

 

[Bravo]

Something I caught tonight that I missed early in was that Barry and Honey arrived home separately on the Wed. night. So one person could have done this. Seemed common knowledge that Barry always worked late. Again IMO this was about suffering and I think whomever did this needed to be there to see the suffering.

 

[BUF]

So, according to this, Barry drove his Mustang to Apotex, Honey drove her SUV after to meet him there. They discussed plans for the new house with the architect there. Honey left to go home. Barry left later.

If correct, that mystery is solved.

 

[canadiangirl]

The problem with a new thread is that it leaves some interesting stuff hanging in the last one ...

Conventional legal wisdom is that you can't defame a dead person (re: Winters' Daily Mail interview), but this is an interesting twist on it https://www.theguardian.com/media/m...ming-dead-relatives-european-ruling-right-sue

The cousins, of course, have no assets worth suing for, but if any of the children inherited their father's appetite for litigation ...?

Yes like did anyone find out who mentioned "hog tied" here before the cousin blabbed that to daily mail?

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

 

[Snoopster]

Something I caught tonight that I missed early in was that Barry and Honey arrived home separately on the Wed. night. So one person could have done this. Seemed common knowledge that Barry always worked late. Again IMO this was about suffering and I think whomever did this needed to be there to see the suffering.

That IS something that was discussed earlier on this forum. It was suggested that that was why there was evidence that Honey was killed in a different location in the house. (i.e. someone killed Honey and then layed in wait for Barry to come home.)

It might also account for the fact that the two bodies had different "dispositions" when they were taken out on guerneys, accounting for different times of death.

(I have wondered if the different states of their bodies was due also partially, or almost fully, due to the fact that their bodies were removed from the house at very different times. Sorry if I am upsetting anyone with these comments. I've tried to be discreet.)

 

[Sphinx]

Thank You Mr. Criminologist for supporting my belief. This was personal and a rage killing.
ETA-not seen in a Prof. hit for obv. reasons

The person who decided they were guilty of some serious act, and who could send a professional kill team, was likely the one who ordered the manner and method of the murders, as well as the staging. That person had a great deal of anger and hate, but those who carried out the deed were cool, calculating, experienced professionals in my opinion. It can still be " personal " when an unemotional team of assassins are sent in. The horror of the method, and the way the bodies were left displayed, in my opinion, also served as a warning to others not to defy certain powerful people. These people are somewhere in the scientific world of Big Pharma and drug companies, and/or the political and Jewish areas that Barry and Honey somehow affected. I think that blaming KW because it looks personal is a mistake. I doubt that he had the financial resources, or the ability to be responsible for the deaths, in spite of all his hate for the Shermans. IMO

 

[musicaljoke]

so now they are into the Kerry portion of the story. KW retold his story about how BS wanted him to hire someone to kill Honey. When the interviewer asked KW if he warned Honey, KW said, "no, I hated Honey".

And there you have it!

Did you happen to recall what year KW claimed this happened?

 

[Grey-St]

I don' t think the agreement says they were to be given 5% of the company. They were allowed to purchase 5% of the company after 2 years of work. Did they even have the money for that? I am not sure if the price was fixed at a particular rate (like stock options) or current market value.

Sure, that's correct, but again, not my point. I'm not saying any of this would have worked out for the cousins in the way set out in this agreement. I'm saying the way it went down and how the possibility was kept from them, was unsavoury, IMO.

 

[Bravo]

There were details I missed getting in on this a bit late Snoopster. I was knee deep on the Blaze B. thread.

 

[mojatato]

Did you happen to recall what year KW claimed this happened?

I believe it was in the late 1990's

 

[Sherlockhemlock]

Not that I'm an expert, but in all the pictures we've seen (including all those earring shots!), Honey's jewellery preferences seemed to be more for high-end costume stuff, which is pricey but not hugely valuable. This was one of the many bizarre statements he made that detracted from his assurance that it was M/S.

Much costume jewelry can look real and More often than you would think real stuff can be mistaken for costume. My mother was a jeweler and her favorite earrings were platinum with mother of pearl, 3 ct Amethyst and several VSI “d” color diamonds valued at about 15k. More than once someone assumed they were Avon

 

[Grey-St]

Not specifically directed at you, but do we have enough facts to say what was actually done and if it was right/wrong?
Why did Barry sell 51% of the company in the 1st place? Later, why did he sell out? Was it his choice or the 51% shareholder? Why did the trust company sell at all? Were they running the company properly? Would the kids have had anything left to inherit had they not sold? Why did they sell so quickly? Why didn't they hold back 20 shares for the brothers to inherit when they were of age and sell the rest? Weren't they responsible for informing the brothers and their adoptive parents the terms of the deal?
There are A LOT more unanswered questions that would help reveal who was at fault here. Is it possible the courts got it right when they ruled in Barry's favor?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

It's really not the law and the court I care about here. It's a moralistic issue I'm questioning. You're right, there's a lot of complexities to this, but how I interpret the information we have, is as I've stated. I would think it would be their responsibility to inform them or the adopted parents of this agreement, I don't know if that happened. The cousins were young when this all happened, I don't really know how you inform a 4 children of a legal agreement. Lots of questions to say the least.

 

[Bravo]

Much costume jewelry can look real and More often than you would think real stuff can be mistaken for costume. My mother was a jeweler and her favorite earrings were platinum with mother of pearl, 3 ct Amethyst and several VSI “d” color diamonds valued at about 15k. More than once someone assumed they were Avon

Well Avon would be happy to hear that. Your Mom? Not so much lol