Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #9

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
andreww said:
Simply put, it was an indication that something might not right within the household. If you read the quote in the Mcleans article the person says "if it was anybody else but Honey..." indicating that missing a meeting is something that she'd never done in the past. I believe that it was not in her nature to do that without letting somebody know. And, when a person has always turned right, you have to ask yourself why they turned left on that one particular day? Some label that a coincidence, but I disagree. Coincidence is a random occurrence of something that is out of your control. This is something that she would never do, but on that day she did, you have to at least wonder why?

ETA - I also thought her explanation was very vague. Not that she had to explain to anyone, but if someone calls me out on missing a meeting I'm going to at least offer a quick explanation as to why it happened. This leads me to believe that the reason was personal as opposed to bad scheduling or something business related.
Click to expand...

What do you mean, wasn’t right? She can’t have been held hostage on Dec 12th so what would prevent her from attending a board meeting or informing the CEO she couldn’t attend in advance? Rather than writing my earlier reply a second time, how was missing this board meeting significant when both the Shermans attended a meeting with the architect a day later, late afternoon on Dec 13th?

Two common reasons people miss meetings are because they record an incorrect time or date, or they just plain forget about it if they’re not watching the clock. Honey did not have a private secretary to organize her day.

Before it’s possible to pass judgement as proof of anything on the Maclean’s article, do you know how long she was member of that Board? For example if she only attended one or two other board meetings in the past, it’d be factually correct to say she never missed a meeting in the past but that’s not much of a record to go by. Do you know how often Board meetings were held, monthly, quarterly? Neither do we know about other Boards which Honey served on, and was she a reliable attendee or did she sometimes fail to appear? Or do you know the answer? Because if you don’t, how can you assume she didn’t attend “because something was not right”?
 
andreww said:
Simply put, it was an indication that something might not right within the household. If you read the quote in the Mcleans article the person says "if it was anybody else but Honey..." indicating that missing a meeting is something that she'd never done in the past. I believe that it was not in her nature to do that without letting somebody know. And, when a person has always turned right, you have to ask yourself why they turned left on that one particular day? Some label that a coincidence, but I disagree. Coincidence is a random occurrence of something that is out of your control. This is something that she would never do, but on that day she did, you have to at least wonder why?

ETA - I also thought her explanation was very vague. Not that she had to explain to anyone, but if someone calls me out on missing a meeting I'm going to at least offer a quick explanation as to why it happened. This leads me to believe that the reason was personal as opposed to bad scheduling or something business related.
Click to expand...
It was reported that they called her and that she answered right away. This indicates that instead of avoiding it and letting it go to voicemail, she actually may have simply forgotten. It may have been the first time she's ever missed a meeting without advance notice on any of the many committees she has been involved with, or maybe not. She may have told the person why she neglected to notify her regrets. Just because the person didn't tell MSM why, or MSM chose not to report the reason, doesn't mean there wasn't a valid one. I would certainly think it coincidental and perhaps related if there wasn't the Wednesday in between her missing the meeting and then dying in her home, but considering she was out and about, in public, in Apotex's offices the following day, I'm just not feeling the relationship. jmo
When I think about the things she had on her plate (that we were aware of) at the time - the first time her home had been for sale to the public in some 20 years (it can be challenging to keep a house magazine-beautiful every minute when you actually live in the home - albeit they had no little ones to clean up after, and had the benefit of a housekeeper - but only twice a week or something); didn't they just have a new grandchild? (I'm assuming there may have been some kind of excitement, emotional and other support given to their child, visits to the new grandchild, etc?); a daughter's wedding in the works (I imagine this might be massive in itself, considering their wealth, expectations, 'appearances', guest lists to consider, etc); an imminent and extended trip to their Florida home within mere days to plan and pack for; any Hannukah celebrations/festivities/customs that H may have enjoyed; invitations and communications with a pile of the couple's friends and family regarding getting together in Florida; the planning and designing and meetings and communications regarding their new home being built; her regular committee/fundraising/charitable work; whatever other things might be involved with being the mom of 3 adult kids (even when they become adults, there can still be involvement and concern and etc); the always lurking lawsuit, which had just been awarded costs to them 6 or 7 days earlier - perhaps conversations and etc about that issue; whatever other lawsuits were in the works (the lobbying thing that was coming up, to name one); perhaps issues that we aren't aware of, within Apo; obviously she was working with a personal trainer of some sort; etc etc etc. Personally, my head would be spinning for sure, and I'm gonna give her a pass, but that's just me. imo.
 
Lexiintoronto said:
@andreww or anyone who has the same theory about there being a coverup, that this is m/s, not m/m.

If it’s a conspiracy the expectation would be that this case will go cold.

Eventually it will likely be revisited by a cold case detective in the future long after the current investigators are gone. Or it could go before an inquest. Isn’t that a huge risk?

An innocent person or persons could be blamed for murder.

ETA: not to mention the fallout for the people involved in any coverup.
Click to expand...

You’re right and I’ve also never heard anyone before suggest deaths could be declared Homicides just to make families happy. Coroners, forensic examiners, LE, sure they can make mistakes but for all of them to know a double homicide never occurred yet go along with fooling the public, wasting money and resources, putting their reputations on the line in orchestrating an investigation of a double homicide that never occurred.....just to make a family happy, no definitely not. That’s simply preposterous. Then I’d also have to believe the earth is flat and Elvis is entertaining at the local pub tomorrow night.
 
The anniversary of the deaths is nearing. What are the three likeliest explanations for them?
 
Lexiintoronto said:
@andreww or anyone who has the same theory about there being a coverup, that this is m/s, not m/m.

If it’s a conspiracy the expectation would be that this case will go cold.

Eventually it will likely be revisited by a cold case detective in the future long after the current investigators are gone. Or it could go before an inquest. Isn’t that a huge risk?

An innocent person or persons could be blamed for murder.

ETA: not to mention the fallout for the people involved in any coverup.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is much risk of that. With no evidence of anybody having been there it would be virtually impossible to convict anybody of this crime. And I wouldn't exactly call this a case of conspiracy. The crime scene was staged to look like a double murder. TPS investigators were likely already on the fence about which way to go. The coroner has admitted as much. However, when outside pressures are applied, including the coroners ex-boss giving his opinion, and the mayor telling the police chief to go easy on the suicide rumours, it is completely possible that LE was swayed. And as both these outside influences were initiated by the family, who were obviously furious at the suggestion of M/S, who is to say that the LE wasn't swayed to the wrong side of the fence?

What I am saying is that it is possible that members of LE and the coroners office may have still done the best job possible, no conspiracy whatsoever, they just may have got it wrong.
 
Andreww, to assume all of the above, you'd have to KNOW what they're thinking, have in the way of evidence and have seen coroners reports.....none of which we are privy to.

You don't know that there is 'no evidence' and the coroner has NOT admitted anything, not a peep other than COD.

Isn't it possible, with zero information, that you are jumping to conclusions?

I, along with a lot of others, are just waiting to see what they have that they are holding close to their chests.
 
MistyWaters said:
What do you mean, wasn’t right? She can’t have been held hostage on Dec 12th so what would prevent her from attending a board meeting or informing the CEO she couldn’t attend in advance? Rather than writing my earlier reply a second time, how was missing this board meeting significant when both the Shermans attended a meeting with the architect a day later, late afternoon on Dec 13th?

Two common reasons people miss meetings are because they record an incorrect time or date, or they just plain forget about it if they’re not watching the clock. Honey did not have a private secretary to organize her day.

Before it’s possible to pass judgement as proof of anything on the Maclean’s article, do you know how long she was member of that Board? For example if she only attended one or two other board meetings in the past, it’d be factually correct to say she never missed a meeting in the past but that’s not much of a record to go by. Do you know how often Board meetings were held, monthly, quarterly? Neither do we know about other Boards which Honey served on, and was she a reliable attendee or did she sometimes fail to appear? Or do you know the answer? Because if you don’t, how can you assume she didn’t attend “because something was not right”?
Click to expand...
No idea obviously. But the fact that this person was alarmed enough to call Honey tells me that this was a very extraordinary occurrence. You and others simply want dismiss it because it would obviously have nothing to do with your theory of what happened. But I'd be very interested in knowing:

- exactly what time the meeting was at
- where was Honey at this time
- where was Barry at this time
- what exactly Honey did before and after that meeting time

Ive said before that I feel that the upcoming move had something to do with this. I think it is possible that Barry was starting to give some pushback on the idea. With Honey's imminent Florida trip just days away, she was likely being pressed for some decisions and possibly Barry wasn't being cooperative. I think that this is what caused her to miss the meeting. I think it also within the realm of possibility that Honey ambushed Barry at his office with the architect, setting in motion the argument that would lead to her death.
 
andreww said:
No idea obviously. But the fact that this person was alarmed enough to call Honey tells me that this was a very extraordinary occurrence. You and others simply want dismiss it because it would obviously have nothing to do with your theory of what happened. But I'd be very interested in knowing:

- exactly what time the meeting was at
- where was Honey at this time
- where was Barry at this time
- what exactly Honey did before and after that meeting time

Ive said before that I feel that the upcoming move had something to do with this. I think it is possible that Barry was starting to give some pushback on the idea. With Honey's imminent Florida trip just days away, she was likely being pressed for some decisions and possibly Barry wasn't being cooperative. I think that this is what caused her to miss the meeting. I think it also within the realm of possibility that Honey ambushed Barry at his office with the architect, setting in motion the argument that would lead to her death.
Click to expand...
Sounds logical, I can't help. We have never heard of BS, that he was stressed out by his many litigation processes. Though the move would have been a great impact of his personal life and he didn't like it at all, I think. Understandable, if one knows of his character.

The question remains: how should he have staged the scene by himself?
 
FromGermany said:
The question remains: how should he have staged the scene by himself?
Click to expand...

Not overly difficult. Barry was old but he wasn't ancient. Wherever he moved the body from was undoubtably upstairs, so he's got gravity on his side. He also had time, even if he was unaware of what was going on at the house the next day, he had all night.
 
FromGermany said:
Sounds logical, I can't help. We have never heard of BS, that he was stressed out by his many litigation processes. Though the move would have been a great impact of his personal life and he didn't like it at all, I think. Understandable, if one knows of his character.

The question remains: how should he have staged the scene by himself?
Click to expand...
rbbm,
BS did not seem to mind the dramatic and bizarre, he put money into it.. although surprised that BS apparently was not impressed enough with the film's top end cameras his money would have helped to obtain, to have any good quality cameras installed at his home, or did he?
Other than HS's promotional video, wonder if the Sherman home was ever used as a film location.....?
imo, speculation, fwiw.
How Did an Oscar-Nominated Legend End Up in This Painfully Amateurish Horror Film?
November 10, 2015
"What is James Caan—Oscar-nominated Godfather icon, generally respected character actor of 50-plus years—doing in a film with the unpromising title Sicilian Vampire? Why would it be programmed as the opening-night film of the Big Apple Film Festival? What is the Big Apple Film Festival? Answers were not immediately forthcoming at Manhattan’s Village East Cinema on Wednesday night, where a surprisingly substantial audience gathered to watch the story of a New York mafioso who turns into a bloodsucker after being bitten by a bat."
"Another part of the budget went to use the wildly expensive 6K Red cameras, effectively the highest-resolution digital cameras readily available on the market. (The film looks like it was shot with a basic consumer camera.)"
"Post-screening, D’Angelo himself took the stage along with Esposito and longtime business partner Barry Sherman, a pharmaceutical company co-founder and co-investor. In the Q&A, D’Angelo said he’d made the film for $15 million Canadian ($11.3 million U.S.) and indicated that most of that money went to make sure people like Caan and Sorvino would show up:"
 
PostTruth said:
The anniversary of the deaths is nearing. What are the three likeliest explanations for them?
Click to expand...

Double Murder by either;
A) People who had business/commercial dealings with Barry, and felt swindled, tricked or duped by him.
B) People unknown to deceased, who held some sort of grudge or hatred towards the Shermans.
C) People related to deceased who were upset at losing the civil suit regarding a share of Apotex, and then being charged $300,000 in court costs.

Murder Suicide by Barry;
A) Possible, but Barry's personality and behavior makes it unlikely.

Botched Robbery;
A) No evidence points to this scenario.
 
andreww said:
No idea obviously. But the fact that this person was alarmed enough to call Honey tells me that this was a very extraordinary occurrence. You and others simply want dismiss it because it would obviously have nothing to do with your theory of what happened. But I'd be very interested in knowing:

- exactly what time the meeting was at
- where was Honey at this time
- where was Barry at this time
- what exactly Honey did before and after that meeting time

Ive said before that I feel that the upcoming move had something to do with this. I think it is possible that Barry was starting to give some pushback on the idea. With Honey's imminent Florida trip just days away, she was likely being pressed for some decisions and possibly Barry wasn't being cooperative. I think that this is what caused her to miss the meeting. I think it also within the realm of possibility that Honey ambushed Barry at his office with the architect, setting in motion the argument that would lead to her death.
Click to expand...

Extraordinary occurance????

I’m going to assume you’ve never served on a board or committee. And that’s why you think it’d be unusual for the CEO to give Honey a quick email after noting she hadn’t arrived at the board meeting, you’re assuming the reason is only because it’s an extraordinary occurance. There’s another common reason - it’s known as courtesy.

It goes like this....people begin to shuffle into the meeting room, politely chit chatting amongst each other and what not. Eventually the chairperson looks at the clock and takes a look around the room to determine if everyone who’s supposed to be there has arrived. One person (Joe) is missing.

“Anyone know if Joe is planning to attend?”
Silence.
“I’ll give Joe a quick text/call/email.”
Yep, Joes just pulling into the parkade.
Meeting starts 7 minutes late, once Joe walks into the room.

In the example of Honey Shermans absence, she informed the CEO she wouldn’t be attending. As a courtesy, it’s absolutely typical for the CEO to email her, not because her absence was an “extraordinary occurance”.

Regardless if you can’t tell us how this “extraordinary occurance” is directly related to her death, it really doesn’t matter does it.
 
Re: Honey not showing/calling.

Perhaps she had a very upset stomach and was indisposed. Headache? Fell asleep?
The woman had recently recovered from throat cancer, remember.
 
andreww said:
I don't think there is much risk of that. With no evidence of anybody having been there it would be virtually impossible to convict anybody of this crime. And I wouldn't exactly call this a case of conspiracy. The crime scene was staged to look like a double murder. TPS investigators were likely already on the fence about which way to go. The coroner has admitted as much. However, when outside pressures are applied, including the coroners ex-boss giving his opinion, and the mayor telling the police chief to go easy on the suicide rumours, it is completely possible that LE was swayed. And as both these outside influences were initiated by the family, who were obviously furious at the suggestion of M/S, who is to say that the LE wasn't swayed to the wrong side of the fence?

What I am saying is that it is possible that members of LE and the coroners office may have still done the best job possible, no conspiracy whatsoever, they just may have got it wrong.
Click to expand...
How do you even figure there is no evidence of anybody having been there? When the bodies were initially discovered, there were in fact, at least SIX people inside the home, aside from the victims. Surely there was evidence of all of those people being in the home. What is one or two more? In any case, why do you figure we would know about that type of evidence, one way or the other? Police have been tight-lipped, aside from the first hours, when they were trying to prevent mayhem.

How can one even think this was staged to appear as a double murder? Anyone could have done a better job of it, if that was the case, by breaking things, stealing things, breaching locks, making messes, leaving clear indications of wrist bindings ON, so many things could have been done. Also, if staging as murder, why the extra steps of hanging them after strangling them? That seems like a far reach. It would have looked far more like murder if they'd just left them strangled on the floor, which also would have been much easier and quicker.
This also, imho, wasn't staged as a double homicide suicide (sorry, meant double suicide) for the obvious reason that H was at least a little battered. That only leaves one remaining option - that it was staged to appear as M/S. Why and who would want to stage this as M/S? Any guesses?

I must have missed when the coroner in this case admitted that "TPS investigators were likely already on the fence about which way to go." When did that happen and where was it published? Please elaborate.
 
Last edited:
PostTruth said:
The anniversary of the deaths is nearing. What are the three likeliest explanations for them?
Click to expand...

Three likeliest explanations for their deaths?

It was a targeted double homicide,
motive: revenge.

I can think of only one because I’m not into far fetched conspiracy theories based on an “everyone lies” philosophy.
 
deugirtni said:
How do you even figure there is no evidence of anybody having been there? When the bodies were initially discovered, there were in fact, at least SIX people inside the home, aside from the victims. Surely there was evidence of all of those people being in the home. What is one or two more? In any case, why do you figure we would know about that type of evidence, one way or the other? Police have been tight-lipped, aside from the first hours, when they were trying to prevent mayhem.

How can one even think this was staged to appear as a double murder? Anyone could have done a better job of it, if that was the case, by breaking things, stealing things, breaching locks, making messes, leaving clear indications of wrist binding, so many things could have been done. Also, if staging as murder, why the extra steps of hanging them after strangling them? That seems like a far reach. It would have looked far more like murder if they'd just left them strangled on the floor, which also would have been much easier and quicker.
This also, imho, wasn't staged as a double homicide for the obvious reason that H was at least a little battered. That only leaves one remaining option - that it was staged to appear as M/S. Why and who would want to stage this as M/S? Any guesses?

I must have missed when the coroner in this case admitted that "TPS investigators were likely already on the fence about which way to go." When did that happen and where was it published? Please elaborate.
Click to expand...
Sure, Honey beat herself up and they both used jackets to bind her wrists before killing themselves. The classic suicide scenario.
 
andreww said:
Sure, Honey beat herself up and they both used jackets to bind her wrists before killing themselves. The classic suicide scenario.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I can't compute. Can you rewrite so I can understand what you're saying?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 176 more.
Total: 4,437 (members: 177, guests: 4,260)

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
4,260
Total visitors
4,437
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,637
Messages
17,972,219
Members
228,847
Latest member
?Unicorn/Fkboi?
Back
Top