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

[deugirtni]

I'd presume that the killer/s had to use Honey up close and personal in order to get to Barry, if he was the main target. If that's true, then the question might be: why didn't the killer simply murder Barry at another place or time, i.e., shooting him as he left his office building at night.
It also always comes back to another question. Why didn't any neighbor surveillance cams or an actual neighbor see anyone else outside the Sherman home that night? I'm presuming Honey knew the killer/s and let them inside.
All these things have been discussed before, but this case is endlessly fascinating to me. I do believe it will be solved one day.

It seems there are many possibilities.. such as they came in through the back where there were no neighboring cameras? Or they arrived inside H's car with her (or B's car for that matter)? Or police actually might *have* footage, but they're not announcing it and have possibly asked any neighbors to keep a lid on it if they want to see this solved? Or someone hid out in the home's basement for a couple of days waiting? It seems footage from say Monday or whatever, was not even looked at by the neighbor, I believe I read that neighbor hadn't even looked at the Wed evening?

 

[deugirtni]

It would be reassuring to think that TPS had the murders figured out almost immediately (not M/S) and were working surreptitiously behind the scenes.

How could they determine that Honey was the main target at such an early stage in their investigation? I don't think that was even possible, and therefore it doesn't explain TPS never applying for warrants to include Barry as a murdered victim in their search for possible motives.

Unfortunately, I think it is apparent that TPS screwed up the investigation for several weeks. But I'm hopeful that they have made progress and may solve this case.

Supposedly based soley on H's facial injuries. Or so they might have us believe?

 

[deugirtni]

I have been thinking about how Barry was found- legs crossed, glasses neatly on his face.
This may sound strange, but As a male, I frankly wouldn't have done that, i.e. position his glasses perfectly, it just seems kind of weird to me, and not a detail that I would worry about, putting glasses back properly on another man's face. I'm not trying to sound sexist, but has anyone considered that perhaps a woman was in the room, and did the final neat and tidy "arranging" of the bodies? I'm not saying women would be more capable of killing anyone, I'm just thinking that putting the glasses back neatly on a man's face might be something that a woman might be more apt to do than a man. I will stop writing now in case I further offend anyone.... Not my intention for sure!! Maybe I should stop watching murder mysteries.

Or.. a male with whatever kind of mental illness would engulf that person with thoughts of setting such a stage, and wanting it to be 'perfect' and to ensure that BS was able to 'see' what happened to him. Would mean someone with a heckuva lot of time to get this job done without fear of being interrupted, I would think.

 

[deugirtni]

I think the answer to that question points to someone killing Barry for his money, and killing Honey to eliminate her as the primary heir. MOO.

It was said in Donovan's book that HS opposed giving so freely to the couple's children. It seemed it was BS that was the giver to the kids, and the holder of that authority. Had HS been left holding the bag, so to speak, who knows what she may have ended up doing with it, in contrast to BS apparently leaving everything to his 4 kids?

 

[rickcross]

I have been thinking about how Barry was found- legs crossed, glasses neatly on his face.
This may sound strange, but As a male, I frankly wouldn't have done that, i.e. position his glasses perfectly, it just seems kind of weird to me, and not a detail that I would worry about, putting glasses back properly on another man's face. I'm not trying to sound sexist, but has anyone considered that perhaps a woman was in the room, and did the final neat and tidy "arranging" of the bodies? I'm not saying women would be more capable of killing anyone, I'm just thinking that putting the glasses back neatly on a man's face might be something that a woman might be more apt to do than a man. I will stop writing now in case I further offend anyone.... Not my intention for sure!! Maybe I should stop watching murder mysteries.

I think the glasses are a non issue. I can shake my head as hard as I can and my reading glasses don't move. IMO, he had them on, never took them off, and they simply didn't need to be adjusted.

 

[ldlager]

It seems there are many possibilities.. such as they came in through the back where there were no neighboring cameras? Or they arrived inside H's car with her (or B's car for that matter)? Or police actually might *have* footage, but they're not announcing it and have possibly asked any neighbors to keep a lid on it if they want to see this solved? Or someone hid out in the home's basement for a couple of days waiting? It seems footage from say Monday or whatever, was not even looked at by the neighbor, I believe I read that neighbor hadn't even looked at the Wed evening?

Wasn't it also mentioned in the book that HS often left the side door unlocked? Or perhaps the killers had a key- they could have gotten it several ways.

 

[deugirtni]

Wasn't it also mentioned in the book that HS often left the side door unlocked? Or perhaps the killers had a key- they could have gotten it several ways.

Yes, no problem apparently getting *into* the home, but how to get in without any neighboring cameras recording it, is more the question, I think? The door was apparently always left open.

It was also said in the book that police had not checked the lockbox to see if the housekey was even still inside - not until the realtor called TPS (I'm not sure at what point in time) to ask if the key was still in it, and was told they didn't know, at which time they went to check on it.

One might assume that looking to see if a partial print might be available on any such key and taking any said possible partial print from any such key may have been part of TPS's due diligence? But no? Another instance of police showing their apparent tunnel-vision that they were either convinced it was a M/S; or they were convinced they knew 'whodunnit', and perhaps that person didn't require the lockbox key, and that person's prints would not be unusual to be found within the home, and it would not be unusual for cameras to record footage of such person visiting the home, etc?

 

[WINDSOR]

I learned a long time ago that "locks only keep honest people out", if the door(s) were left unlocked it would be irrelevant to a determined person(s).

The TPS has a history of keeping a lot of information away from the public. If they have videos that show the likely assailants coming and going, they are not likely to announce that publicly. In the Bruce MacArthur case, they had no intention of arresting Bruce, they were just maintaining surveillance, until they realised that Bruce was likely in the process of committing another murder.

Regarding cameras, I do not know, but how long do these home cameras keep the images? I have heard some delete the video automatically after 24 or 48 hours. Do some keep the record for weeks or longer?

 

[deugirtni]

I learned a long time ago that "locks only keep honest people out", if the door(s) were left unlocked it would be irrelevant to a determined person(s).

The TPS has a history of keeping a lot of information away from the public. If they have videos that show the likely assailants coming and going, they are not likely to announce that publicly. In the Bruce MacArthur case, they had no intention of arresting Bruce, they were just maintaining surveillance, until they realised that Bruce was likely in the process of committing another murder.

Regarding cameras, I do not know, but how long do these home cameras keep the images? I have heard some delete the video automatically after 24 or 48 hours. Do some keep the record for weeks or longer?

I think (but not sure) it may be a setting which the homeowner can choose, as to how long video is kept or what kind of a rewrite loop it's on.. but as far as the neighbor across the street whose camera caught the man in the car going into the house a few times, I believe it was said theirs would overwrite after a week/7 days.

 

[Tripod]

It seems there are many possibilities.. such as they came in through the back where there were no neighboring cameras? Or they arrived inside H's car with her (or B's car for that matter)? Or police actually might *have* footage, but they're not announcing it and have possibly asked any neighbors to keep a lid on it if they want to see this solved? Or someone hid out in the home's basement for a couple of days waiting? It seems footage from say Monday or whatever, was not even looked at by the neighbor, I believe I read that neighbor hadn't even looked at the Wed evening?

I agree. I thought about the killer/s possibly being in Honey's car, too, but even if careful in the extreme to not leave behind any forensic evidence, wouldn't you think a strange hair or fiber, at the least, would have been found?
I've thought for a long time that Honey was killed, or certainly subdued, before Barry returned home and that's why I don't think the perp would have ridden home with him.

 

[deugirtni]

I agree. I thought about the killer/s possibly being in Honey's car, too, but even if careful in the extreme to not leave behind any forensic evidence, wouldn't you think a strange hair or fiber, at the least, would have been found?
I've thought for a long time that Honey was killed, or certainly subdued, before Barry returned home and that's why I don't think the perp would have ridden home with him.

What if fibers and hairs were found in H's vehicle, but it was not strange for it to have been found inside her vehicle? ie someone who is known to have been in the vehicle with her before. Same with the house.

 

[rickcross]

What if fibers and hairs were found in H's vehicle, but it was not strange for it to have been found inside her vehicle? ie someone who is known to have been in the vehicle with her before. Same with the house.

Exactly. Fibers and forensics are more often for confirming a suspect rather than identifying them. The great majority of people don't have a profile on file, so even if you have blood, semen, saliva, hairs or even fingerprints, it means nothing unless you can match it up to someone. In cases where the suspect is extremely close, you would expect there to be some sort of forensic evidence to be there.

 

[deugirtni]

Exactly. Fibers and forensics are more often for confirming a suspect rather than identifying them. The great majority of people don't have a profile on file, so even if you have blood, semen, saliva, hairs or even fingerprints, it means nothing unless you can match it up to someone. In cases where the suspect is extremely close, you would expect there to be some sort of forensic evidence to be there.

Seems odd though, that TPS wasn't calling in the people known to have been inside the home in the days preceding the discovery of the bodies, in order to rule them out, ie gardener, cleaner, realtor, homebuyer clients, family members(?). Seems like TPS may have had some kind of tunnel-vision going on, whether it was specifically geared toward M/S, or a person they may have suspected from the beginning, but whom they wanted to keep thinking they were focusing on M/S. Either way, it seems like lack of due diligence.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I have been thinking about how Barry was found- legs crossed, glasses neatly on his face.
This may sound strange, but As a male, I frankly wouldn't have done that, i.e. position his glasses perfectly, it just seems kind of weird to me, and not a detail that I would worry about, putting glasses back properly on another man's face. I'm not trying to sound sexist, but has anyone considered that perhaps a woman was in the room, and did the final neat and tidy "arranging" of the bodies? I'm not saying women would be more capable of killing anyone, I'm just thinking that putting the glasses back neatly on a man's face might be something that a woman might be more apt to do than a man. I will stop writing now in case I further offend anyone.... Not my intention for sure!! Maybe I should stop watching murder mysteries.

It was HS' habit, to dress her husband head to toe (choosing clothing for him) and to watch him, ie. sitting in an interview in a wrong (less upright) posture, and to criticize him. So, I thought, the only one, who would have cared for him wearing his glasses neatly also after death, would be HS.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Strangulation is an up-close-and-personal way to kill, as I recall KD's book reminds us. IMO HS was as much a hated target as her husband. If money was one motive, the other had to be very personal and intense ... which if true, narrows the suspect list considerably. And it was HS who is said to have tried to discourage his practice of making large financial gifts to their children and some of his friends.

KW could confirm it, AFAIK, regarding himself and BS' "banking" and HS' reaction.

 

[nuff]

It was HS' habit, to dress her husband head to toe (choosing clothing for him) and to watch him, ie. sitting in an interview in a wrong (less upright) posture, and to criticize him. So, I thought, the only one, who would have cared for him wearing his glasses neatly also after death, would be HS.

Interesting observation! It could, of course, also be a post-mortem criticism of HS and her seemingly controlling nature from a killer who knew this first-hand.

 

[nuff]

Seems odd though, that TPS wasn't calling in the people known to have been inside the home in the days preceding the discovery of the bodies, in order to rule them out, ie gardener, cleaner, realtor, homebuyer clients, family members(?). Seems like TPS may have had some kind of tunnel-vision going on, whether it was specifically geared toward M/S, or a person they may have suspected from the beginning, but whom they wanted to keep thinking they were focusing on M/S. Either way, it seems like lack of due diligence.

Tunnel vision and/ or, as KD points out in the book, their resources were spread too thin at the time as they were focussed on the MacArthur investigation. But do we know for a fact they did not follow these steps given how much of what they were doing (or not doing) is still not available?

 

[deugirtni]

Tunnel vision and/ or, as KD points out in the book, their resources were spread too thin at the time as they were focussed on the MacArthur investigation. But do we know for a fact they did not follow these steps given how much of what they were doing (or not doing) is still not available?

I think we do know 'for a fact' - because I believe those people have been quoted in MSM as verifying that. ie the Asian realtor confirmed that he hadn't been fingerprinted/shoes hadn't been taken, weeks later; the neighbor with the footage confirmed that police weren't in a rush to obtain that footage even though they'd been told it would be rewritten. Those are independent statements from others. As well, Donovan says in his book that others also were not fingerprinted and such, such as the cleaner, gardener, etc. But even if we don't take Donovan's word for it, which we really have no reason NOT to, that info *has* been verified by those others at least.

And sure, maybe they were spread way too thin due to the McArthur case, but that is no reason to lead the public to believe certain things just because they didn't have the resources to get around to investigating the situation fully?

 

[Lexiintoronto]

It was HS' habit, to dress her husband head to toe (choosing clothing for him) and to watch him, ie. sitting in an interview in a wrong (less upright) posture, and to criticize him. So, I thought, the only one, who would have cared for him wearing his glasses neatly also after death, would be HS.

Interesting observation! It could, of course, also be a post-mortem criticism of HS and her seemingly controlling nature from a killer who knew this first-hand.

There is a moment in the video where she affectionately tucks in his tie. At the 3:26 mark of the video is where she makes the comment mentioned above:

@ldlager mentioned the attention to detail in the staging seems feminine. I agree. Feminine, affectionate or respectful, despite what happened.

It’s very intimate to get that close to a body and position the legs and glasses, IMO.

Would a hit man take note of the glasses and their importance if they had come off?

Off topic, but look at the body language in this still:



It may just be her resting facial expression, but she looks concerned or unhappy, in my view.

 

[ldlager]

There is a moment in the video where she affectionately tucks in his tie. At the 3:26 mark of the video is where she makes the comment mentioned above:

@ldlager mentioned the attention to detail in the staging seems feminine. I agree. Feminine, affectionate or respectful, despite what happened.

It’s very intimate to get that close to a body and position the legs and glasses, IMO.

Would a hit man take note of the glasses and their importance if they had come off?

Off topic, but look at the body language in this still:

View attachment 215708

It may just be her resting facial expression, but she looks concerned or unhappy, in my view.

Agree with you Lexi. I’m no expert, but her left fist is clenched and her leg is crossed away from him for most of the video. Imo she also comes across as quite controlling. Imo