Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #8

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

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MistyWaters

    MistyWaters Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,789
    Likes Received:
    49,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Makes sense, thank you very much for satisfying my curiosity!
     


  2. MistyWaters

    MistyWaters Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,789
    Likes Received:
    49,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’m also thinking it makes the lawsuit proceedings far more difficult now as the Shermans are deceased. Because the lawsuit was dismissed I wonder what’s to prevent the executor of Estate of Barry Sherman from proceeding with administration and disbursal. As you say, winning a lawsuit that can’t be collected, what’s the point.
     
    ScotAng, human, JDG and 2 others like this.
  3. dotr

    dotr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    39,960
    Likes Received:
    86,615
    Trophy Points:
    113
  4. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Much of the son's eulogy was about how the couple each had their own strengths, how each of the couple complemented its other half, how each made their children feel loved even though they weren't in the same ways. The lock and key were just a part of an entire description. Perhaps somewhat opposite personalities, coming together to make one balanced couple. For me anyway, the lock and key fit in with everything else he was saying.:

    Jonathon Sherman pays tribute to his parents Barry and Honey Sherman - Macleans.ca
     
    Sanz, kimpage, ScotAng and 6 others like this.
  5. JDG

    JDG Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,065
    Likes Received:
    25,817
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Possibly a European phrase as well. Anyone remember that bridge in Paris where you show your love with a lock. Then, you toss the key into the Seinne river.
     
    Sanz, deugirtni, dotr and 3 others like this.
  6. MistyWaters

    MistyWaters Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,789
    Likes Received:
    49,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Glad we agree! By your original post, I was mistaken in presuming you thought differently about his reference to “useless”.

     
    dotr likes this.
  7. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I wonder why not? According to media reports, they'd been in Old Colony since 1990, and your relationship with the Shermans did not 'start to sour' until 1999.
     
    JDG, ScotAng, SeesSeas and 3 others like this.
  8. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Kerry when is it that this conversation happened with HS which you reported to Fifth Estate? Also, at which house - the report states the conversation happened at their house. You have stated openly that you hated HS. The relationship according to media reports didn't start to sour until 1999, and the Shermans lived at their current Old Colony house since 1990. Am I making a leap to assume that you wouldn't have hated HS prior to the relationship starting to sour?
    ---
    as posted above:
    Beginning @ appx 15:55 into the Feb 2nd Fifth Estate documentary:
    But Kerry Winter says Honey Sherman was not enthusiastic about her husband’s renewed relationship with his cousins. He said she had some tough questions for him at their house one day. <begin KW clip>...... “And I didn’t understand her line of questions. What do you want with my husband or how much money is he giving you and she started to berate me and I remember going...uh leaving that day thinking something was amiss....”
     
    human, JDG, kimpage and 3 others like this.
  9. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly. Something just isn't right, imho, with the thinking that the W orphans are entitled to 20%. The Tim's example is excellent. In my own mind, I was thinking about how, on marital dissolution, an assessment is made on values.. and split up accordingly.. but that then-current value can't then later be sued for more, just because one of the spouses went on AFTER divorce, to become much more successful in the future.

    Basically, it seems like it's even somewhat similar to selling a property. Seller sells it at fair market value at that time, and if 2 (or 4 or 10) years into the future, by a stroke of luck, property values increased by 30% - that seller is SOL. (In BS case, he actually paid some 40% more for it than another seller was willing to have paid at same time - BS reportedly purchased the company for $350,000 and we've read that the judge noted that amount was $100,000 more than the other, competing offer on the table at the same time). It is by BS's hard work that the company prospered, not by luck. When Royal Trust was responsible for running it/overseeing it, it was failing fast.

    The stipulation was that the boys, even if they had been hired as 'responsible employees' after age 21, had to be employed for 2 years. This never happened. How can it be assumed that it *would* have happened, even if the boys *had* been responsible enough to have been hired? And nevermind that in the first place, that company had been sold to someone else who had no such agreement. It just seems so outrageous to me, I am sorry if that offends anyone.

    Sadly, it seems that the whole premise of this story is that parents need to ensure they make arrangements for their children, and business owners need to ensure a plan is in effect for how the business will operate in the event the owner dies. Hard lessons.

    jmo
     
    Sanz, Kittybunny, JDG and 9 others like this.
  10. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not sure what we agree about, because I thought you thought something entirely different about the son's mention of the couple being like a lock and key? But in any case, it was one of our members who stated the 'useless' part, and I was just kind of chuckling at the wording, that's all :)

    edited for: typo
     
  11. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why can't it be collected? Sorry, I'm feeling a little lost?
     
    dotr and JDG like this.
  12. MistyWaters

    MistyWaters Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,789
    Likes Received:
    49,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hypothetically, if a civil suit is won, the Court determines that X owes Y the amount of lawsuit and a Judgement is issued accordingly.

    But the Court doesn’t dwelve into X’s financial situation to determine if X has the $ available nor does X immediately hand over the $ to the Court. The onus is upon Y to initiate proceedings to collect on the basis of the valid Judgement and if there’s no $ or assets available or found, then indeed X won in court but gets nothing.

    In the case of deceased persons, particularly where estates are probated, the assets are legally distributed to beneficiaries in accordance to instructions in their will. Unless a Judge freezes an estate in order to allow a lawsuit to proceed, the assets within all estates become nil as the executor performs their duty. JMO

    How To Enforce Civil Judgments in Ontario
     
    Deleted member 102539, JDG and dotr like this.
  13. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Agreed, however I believe that Apotex was named in the lawsuit and it is a viable corporation which is still active. A corporation can't be dissolved, even if the children who presumably inherited it wanted to dissolve it, and leave an open lawsuit on the table. Otherwise every corporation that was being sued would just dissolve and set up shop under a different name. jmo.
     
  14. MistyWaters

    MistyWaters Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,789
    Likes Received:
    49,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    According to canlii, the civil suit is filed against four parties. If it were eventually successful, that doesn’t mean a Judgement would be filed against each of the four parties. Considering the civil suit focused directly on the question of Barry Sherman’s fiduciary duty, frankly I think it’d be a real stretch to imagine a Judge would hold any other party or seperate entity responsible other than he (his estate).

    Regardless, we’re talking about a civil suit that’s already been dismissed twice in lower courts, without ever going to trial. So I think predetermining its success is very much a moot point.

    I wonder why the dismissal of the Royal Trust lawsuit as well as the Ontario Court of Appeal wasn’t taken onward to the Supreme Court of Canada? For whatever reason, then the focus of the lawsuit changed and directly applied to Barry Sherman.

    “[39] The plaintiffs argue that they were vulnerable. However, vulnerability alone is insufficient to create a fiduciary duty: Elder, at para. 28. Even if there is vulnerability the relevant consideration is the extent to which it arises from the relationship between the fiduciary and the beneficiary. Here, the plaintiffs were not vulnerable because of anything Sherman had done. Rather, they were vulnerable because of the unfortunate deaths of their parents and because they were young. The fiduciary relationship that existed was between the plaintiffs and Royal Trust as executor of their parents’ estates....”
    CanLII - 2017 ONSC 5492 (CanLII)
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2018
  15. drama_farmer

    drama_farmer Central Kentucky (Bluegrass)

    Messages:
    1,223
    Likes Received:
    10,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There have been a number of comments addressing how the belt/railing configuration could work, so I've created a mock-up that provides one interpretation. Think of it as a generic visual aid, and NOT an exact facsimile. IMO. The proportions are way off. I used what I had handy: a thin leather strap (not a belt) and a standard wooden stair rail.

    The first pic shows a loop very close to the "railing" while the 2nd pic shows more room between the loop and the railing.
    Notice that the "knot" in the leather is quite simple. If the loop were holding up a weight, the pressure would keep this simple "knot" in place.

    20180715_152138.jpg 20180715_152035.jpg
     
    8paws, Sanz, Tripod and 6 others like this.
  16. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's hard to imagine a judge holding anything to do with BS responsible, imho.. but one never knows...

    I'm even having difficulty with RT being sued.. because in effect, the owner, the Winters' dad, had left no plan in effect. The mom didn't accept BS's offer.. so RT was left to just oversee the running of it.. who says it's that easy to pull an executive out of nowhere who is able to keep it running at full value, etc? So they sold it before the company's losses were too great.. and end of story. That's how I see it anyway.
     
    ScotAng, MistyWaters, Hann and 2 others like this.
  17. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mightn't the weight make the simple 'knot' at the railing come undone though? And if we imagine that the belt size was perhaps say for a 34" waist.. how long would the belt be? Would that be long enough to tie a knot around the railing in addition to being belted around a human neck? And finally, imagine that the belt was say 1.5 to 1.75" wide - being that width, wouldn't it require even more length to tie said knot? In any case, thank you for performing that experiment for us, that is helpful!
     
    anonymess, human and dotr like this.
  18. hudunit

    hudunit Active Member

    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    133
    Trophy Points:
    33
    Take the belt and put it around the neck like it was your waist.Pull tight lots of belt left to tie around the railing.Lean forward and as you lean forward belt tightens around neck..and you know what happens.I tried it and the belt did not come loose from the railing.I did not continue..but was testing this method.Entirely possible.The more you lean forward...the tighter the belt around the neck.
     
    MistyWaters, deugirtni and dotr like this.
  19. deugirtni

    deugirtni Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    22,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I wasn't talking about the neck part coming loose in my post above, but the knot around the railing, as it is pictured. The neck part was tightened in the normal belt-buckle fashion. I don't know anything about 'knots' though, so it's certainly possible that that type of knot could stay in place and get tighter with the weight. So would a man's size say 34" waist belt be long enough to do that knot around the railing assuming it was 1.5-1.75" wide?
     
  20. ^^^^ This.
    Perhaps another test and pic of it (drama_farmer)?
     
    dotr, JDG and deugirtni like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

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