Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #14

[tayaway]

I don’t believe LE has allowed dust to settle in the case at all. It would seem to me KD is attempting to follow developments, rather than lead. Can you think of an example how KD might be driving forward LE regarding the Sherman instigation?

You argued that nobody on the outside can move LE to act. I gave an example that disproved that. Your assertion wasn't about the Sherman case, but how LE operates.

The discussion here about this particular case, however, is engaging and I'm enjoying the new comments as they come in.

 

[MistyWaters]

You argued that nobody on the outside can move LE to act. I gave an example that disproved that. Your assertion wasn't about the Sherman case, but how LE operates.

The discussion here about this particular case, however, is engaging and I'm enjoying the new comments as they come in.

I’m sorry, maybe my writing wasn’t clear. I was not speaking in general terms, nor arguing, as the topic of this thread is the Shermans’ murder investigation.

Are you familiar with the trial of Jian Ghomeshi? Your comparison would be more comparable to that, however he was found not guilty of choking and SA charges. The commonality however is KD and he wrote a book about it as well.

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/episo...sm-behind-the-jian-ghomeshi-scandal-1.3792891
Kevin Donovan reveals the journalism behind the Jian Ghomeshi scandal

 

[tayaway]

I’m sorry, maybe my writing wasn’t clear. I was not speaking in general terms, nor arguing, as the topic of this thread is the Shermans’ murder investigation.

Are you familiar with the trial of Jian Ghomeshi? Your comparison would be more comparable to that, however he was found not guilty of choking and SA charges. The commonality however is KD and he wrote a book about it as well.

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/episo...sm-behind-the-jian-ghomeshi-scandal-1.3792891
Kevin Donovan reveals the journalism behind the Jian Ghomeshi scandal

How can we put pressure on LE so that they treat all cases with consistent, balanced investigative action, without prejudice, or is that even possible? Can we develop a set of checks and balances so we don't have to rely on chance outside elements?

Yes, I'm familiar with the Jian Ghomeshi case, which Canadaland's Jesse Brown broke, while the CBC sat on it for years. As the link notes, Brown approached The Star and Donovan agreed to work with him. You bring up an excellent example of how the press can suppress crucial stories instead of shedding light on them. I can't remember if any of the victims went to LE or not.

I assume LE has been keeping track of their actions regarding the Sherman case. If there is a question of negligence or delay, the appropriate authority would find it. LE integrity matters to all cases, not just Sherman's. How much of a role KD played isn't clear, although maybe it's noted in his latest book, The Billionaire Murders, which I've yet to read.

 

[Kerry Winter]

det price is probably not calling the shots here. As posted earlier, someone else may in fact be pulling the strings. Just like early on when mayor Tory paid a visit to the chief of police to tell him the family didn’t agree with the way tps was handling the case.

I guess it’s commonplace for the mayor of a city telling the chief of police he got it wrong and the family’s upset.

 

[Kerry Winter]

SUSAN GOMES confirmed on January 26th 2018 that the Honey and Barry Sherman were murdered. They were able to have access to Barry's phone etc shortly before that date. If they had found a suicide note or any searches for ways to commit suicide I don't think they would had that press conference.

Gomes was so believable during the press conference.....NOT.

 

[CAMBRIAN]

As I recall, H.S. had undergone throat surgery in the past. That being so, a slight struggle or grabbing around the neck area could have resulted in damage to her airways. BS could have blown a fuse. LE indicated that there were signs of struggle somewhere else in the house. Her cell phone was parked in her bathroom. An argument after the visit to the architect would have ensued for reasons we do not know. She probably choked and BS panicked. He did not want to be crucified in the public arena as a murderer. He went on to stage the rest. He had plenty of time. Ligature compression to her neck [as found by the pathology report] would easily mask the husband/wife struggle. BS did not believe in an afterlife....he would not be afraid of eternal punishment. I am still leaning towards the initial LE conclusion that this was M/S. I am not discounting 100% double murder, but if that is the case, it was very personal, deliberate, macabre, with malice and deep down hatred . Definitely not a mafioso contract killing.

 

[Satchie]

In the Jeffrey Epstein case, LE left things alone after JE and his coconspirators got their sweetheart deal in 2008 and didn't start investigating again until the Miami Herald 'Perversion of Justice' piece published in 2018. Freedom of the press is crucial in tackling corruption at the top or maintaining transparency.

The Epstein case was not about police corruption, it was about the deal created by the Miami US prosecutor Acosta (a political position).

The journalists in 2008 knew all about the deal and about the police protests against the deal: they reported on it!
After long probe, Palm Beach billionaire faces solicitation charge

"Police Chief Michael Reiter was so angry with State Attorney Barry Krischer's handling of the case that he wrote a memo suggesting the county's top prosecutor disqualify himself"

The police chief also went to the New York Times in 2006 but it's behind a paywall for me. Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case (Published 2006)

So why didn't reporters follow up the story back then? Why didn't they fearlessly fight corruption, and instead just basically go silent?

IMO, because they didn't care: it wouldn't sell newspapers. It was only after MeToo that they went looking for stories that they figured they could get some mileage from. And only after MeToo that women began to feel entitled to raise these issues.

In the Sherman case, journalists were not necessary to alert TPS that there were two suspicious deaths at 50 Old Colony Road. Journalists are not necessary to let the world know that homicide is the most serious crime of all, and not just something that rich playboys do for fun and lets wink wink, nudge nudge and just make sure they don't do it again.

 

[Satchie]

How can we put pressure on LE so that they treat all cases with consistent, balanced investigative action, without prejudice, or is that even possible? Can we develop a set of checks and balances so we don't have to rely on chance outside elements?

Yes, I'm familiar with the Jian Ghomeshi case, which Canadaland's Jesse Brown broke, while the CBC sat on it for years. As the link notes, Brown approached The Star and Donovan agreed to work with him. You bring up an excellent example of how the press can suppress crucial stories instead of shedding light on them. I can't remember if any of the victims went to LE or not.

I assume LE has been keeping track of their actions regarding the Sherman case. If there is a question of negligence or delay, the appropriate authority would find it. LE integrity matters to all cases, not just Sherman's. How much of a role KD played isn't clear, although maybe it's noted in his latest book, The Billionaire Murders, which I've yet to read.

Why is KD only covering this story about 'The Billionaire Murders'? Why isn't he investing a similar amount of time and energy into investigating other homicides? Oh yes, he has to keep on the case because we all know how neglected billionaires are in society, how little people care about billionaires...someone has to be the champion of the billionaires and their right to justice!

Give me a break. He's doing this because no one's going to buy a book called The Homeless Couple Murders, or even the Middle class couple murders.

Makes me somewhat sick, the hypocracy.

ETA: No, I correct myself. What makes me somewhat sick is that people buy into this hypocracy.

 

[ldlager]

Why is KD only covering this story about 'The Billionaire Murders'? Why isn't he investing a similar amount of time and energy into investigating other homicides? Oh yes, he has to keep on the case because we all know how neglected billionaires are in society, how little people care about billionaires...someone has to be the champion of the billionaires and their right to justice!

Give me a break. He's doing this because no one's going to buy a book called The Homeless Couple Murders, or even the Middle class couple murders.

Makes me somewhat sick, the hypocracy.

ETA: No, I correct myself. What makes me somewhat sick is that people buy into this hypocracy.

I suspect KD works for many of the same reasons many of us do- earn an income to support yourself and your family; leave something for your children; improve your community or society by doing charitable works with some of the money you earn. Help others as best one can.

It’s not like KD is killing babies, or causing worldwide hunger. I’m not ashamed to say that like him (I suspect) I too try and maximize my income, given the skill sets that I have and the opportunities that i work to create. I Try to do so in a way that doesn’t hurt others, as most feeling humans I’m sure try to do. I’m not sure if that makes me a hypocrite, but so be it.

If people don’t like what KD does, or what he chooses to work on (BTW I suspect his employer has a say in this also, but isn’t that just regular life?) no one is forcing them to read his work or buy his books. If people don’t like me or my work, they don’t hire me. Its pretty simple really.

No offence intended here- I just fall on the side of supporting what KD does and What he has done in reporting on this case. In fairness, your point about him not reporting on homeless murders may be valid, but I suspect that equally as “guilty” are the millions of people that would have little to no interest in reading about such a case.

 

[deugirtni]

I suspect KD works for many of the same reasons many of us do- earn an income to support yourself and your family; leave something for your children; improve your community or society by doing charitable works with some of the money you earn. Help others as best one can.

It’s not like KD is killing babies, or causing worldwide hunger. I’m not ashamed to say that like him (I suspect) I too try and maximize my income, given the skill sets that I have and the opportunities that i work to create. I Try to do so in a way that doesn’t hurt others, as most feeling humans I’m sure try to do. I’m not sure if that makes me a hypocrite, but so be it.

If people don’t like what KD does, or what he chooses to work on (BTW I suspect his employer has a say in this also, but isn’t that just regular life?) no one is forcing them to read his work or buy his books. If people don’t like me or my work, they don’t hire me. Its pretty simple really.

No offence intended here- I just fall on the side of supporting what KD does and What he has done in reporting on this case. In fairness, your point about him not reporting on homeless murders may be valid, but I suspect that equally as “guilty” are the millions of people that would have little to no interest in reading about such a case.

Agreed. KD is not self-employed. This 'story' was assigned to him by his superiors. He seems to treat his assignments with gusto (ie he also has been known to write books about cases). What's that 'saying' about finding a career doing what you love and it won't feel like work, or something to that effect? It started out perhaps that this may be a regular husband-kills-wife-then-kills-self story (there seem to be many of those historically), but this case has taken many twists and turns. This case has much public interest, I believe because of the many twists and turns, and not because of the 'billionaire', although the wealth involved seems to make it that much more intriguing, imho. Other media outlets quote KD because he IS following up on things to this day, where others do not and likely can not. If we are not interested in the quirks in this case, nor in 'sleuthing', then why are we here? KD is respectful enough not to go around blatantly making undue accusations about any one POI, unlike many other stories I have followed in MSM, which have completely disgusted me. Not sure what people are looking for.

 

[Satchie]

I suspect KD works for many of the same reasons many of us do- earn an income to support yourself and your family; leave something for your children; improve your community or society by doing charitable works with some of the money you earn. Help others as best one can.

It’s not like KD is killing babies, or causing worldwide hunger. I’m not ashamed to say that like him (I suspect) I too try and maximize my income, given the skill sets that I have and the opportunities that i work to create. I Try to do so in a way that doesn’t hurt others, as most feeling humans I’m sure try to do. I’m not sure if that makes me a hypocrite, but so be it.

If people don’t like what KD does, or what he chooses to work on (BTW I suspect his employer has a say in this also, but isn’t that just regular life?) no one is forcing them to read his work or buy his books. If people don’t like me or my work, they don’t hire me. Its pretty simple really.

No offence intended here- I just fall on the side of supporting what KD does and What he has done in reporting on this case. In fairness, your point about him not reporting on homeless murders may be valid, but I suspect that equally as “guilty” are the millions of people that would have little to no interest in reading about such a case.

Exactly, so why don't people believe the same thing about police? Why are they automatically assumed to be incompetent and corrupt?

 

[deugirtni]

Interesting, I’ve never got the impression KD’s mission is to keep TPS on their toes. I don’t recall even one example where he’s ever criticized TPS based on his own personal involvement.

As for his reports about what people tell him, he doesn’t guarantee the accuracy, he doesn’t offer his opinion, nor does he have the ability to balance his reporting about what his sources tell him with “the other side of the story” and there almost always is one. That’s not just him, that’s par for the course in the media business. Speculation, drama, creating interest by attention-getting headlines is how MSM thrives.

It’s certainly good thing our Courts do not operate under the same principle as the media.

I'm not sure what is meant by 'based on his own personal involvement'. KD has reported on different cases, but I believe his cases/stories are assigned to him by his superiors as he works for an employer. I'm not sure if he has reported on these cases, but simply considering the facts in some cases that we DO know, it doesn't kill us to have a reporter following a case and reporting on it to the public, imho.

Like it or not, LE has indeed screwed up MANY times in the recent past. Cases immediately come to my mind right off the top - Laura Babcock, the gay village murders, Wayne Millard, Tess Richey, Audrey Gleave (imho), the recent Nova Scotia mass shootings, and I'm sure there are plenty more both recent and historical. Thankfully KD is not beholden to LE for what he reports about them. He *is* beholden to keep the confidentiality of his sources if that was the agreement made. He's not out to get anyone fired or disowned. I don't feel like he just goes around willy nilly interviewing just anyone, no matter if they really know anything at all about the cases he covers.

To me, it is completely unreasonable to expect a news reporter to guarantee the words of those he interviews. Nobody can do that. Which 'other side of the story' are you referring to? It seems to me that KD has made attempts to speak to everyone involved in any way, anyone who knew the Shermans, etc. It seems to me he IS trying to get all kinds of sides to this story, personal perspectives, a personal touch about the victims, whatever. Personally, I'm grateful for reporters who do NOT give their opinion, and only report the 'facts'. The 'facts' in this case for him, are the words and other documentation or whatever, that his sources have provided him with. I believe he does check out things as much as he can. He is not LE, so his abilities in that regard are stifled. LE is privy to all, but they are silent, as always. For me, I like to hear the back-stories and such, rather than have total black-out until a trial comes years later. We can pick and choose what to believe and how to interpret things, and to just ignore as well, etc.

 

[MistyWaters]

Exactly, so why don't people believe the same thing about police? Why are they automatically assumed to be incompetent and corrupt?

Sign of the times, LE is assumed to be incompetent and corrupt, plus the general public enjoys reading about the downfall of wealthy people and/or their families. The media thrives on it.

 

[MistyWaters]

I'm not sure what is meant by 'based on his own personal involvement'. KD has reported on different cases, but I believe his cases/stories are assigned to him by his superiors as he works for an employer. I'm not sure if he has reported on these cases, but simply considering the facts in some cases that we DO know, it doesn't kill us to have a reporter following a case and reporting on it to the public, imho.

Like it or not, LE has indeed screwed up MANY times in the recent past. Cases immediately come to my mind right off the top - Laura Babcock, the gay village murders, Wayne Millard, Tess Richey, Audrey Gleave (imho), the recent Nova Scotia mass shootings, and I'm sure there are plenty more both recent and historical. Thankfully KD is not beholden to LE for what he reports about them. He *is* beholden to keep the confidentiality of his sources if that was the agreement made. He's not out to get anyone fired or disowned. I don't feel like he just goes around willy nilly interviewing just anyone, no matter if they really know anything at all about the cases he covers.

To me, it is completely unreasonable to expect a news reporter to guarantee the words of those he interviews. Nobody can do that. Which 'other side of the story' are you referring to? It seems to me that KD has made attempts to speak to everyone involved in any way, anyone who knew the Shermans, etc. It seems to me he IS trying to get all kinds of sides to this story, personal perspectives, a personal touch about the victims, whatever. Personally, I'm grateful for reporters who do NOT give their opinion, and only report the 'facts'. The 'facts' in this case for him, are the words and other documentation or whatever, that his sources have provided him with. I believe he does check out things as much as he can. He is not LE, so his abilities in that regard are stifled. LE is privy to all, but they are silent, as always. For me, I like to hear the back-stories and such, rather than have total black-out until a trial comes years later. We can pick and choose what to believe and how to interpret things, and to just ignore as well, etc.

I wouldn’t expect anyone to come forth to tell their side of the story to the media to counter claims from unnamed sources, particularly during a murder investigation. I’m certain KD is fully aware of that.

 

[ldlager]

Exactly, so why don't people believe the same thing about police? Why are they automatically assumed to be incompetent and corrupt?

I guess for the same reason that many people automatically disbelieve what an investigative journalist writes based on his or her sources when their identities cannot be disclosed. For all I know, some people may be more amenable and willing to talk to a journalist than the police, and so the journalist may have better or more info or even more accurate info than LE!
We know of at least one person who has refused to talk to police. I wonder if he or she has been interviewed by KD?

 

[Lexiintoronto]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Respectfully snipped by me:

*** I wasn’t 100% sure Barry killed Honey then hung himself until my 4 hour interrogation/interview/q+a with Detective Price and my coffee shop get together with Tom Klatt. They’re both very bad poker players and both confirmed what l know to be true. Both Brandon and Tom wanted to know:

1. How l knew so much.

2. The name of the retired homicide detective who spoke about the M/S.

3. And more, including the computerized alarm system which monitored all windows and doors at 50. That Honey was dead/killed somewhere else in the house.. her body moved to the basement pool and hung. She was dead 6-9 hours before Barry. Nobody came/left the house except Honey and Barry.

4. I was questioned by the TPS 5 months after Dec 15th....and NEVER questioned as a suspect! Only mission: find out what l know.
When l left 31 division at 1:00am., the last thing l said to Price as he gave me back my iPhone, “do the right thing. Go back to your original theory of murder/suicide and tell the good people of Toronto the truth”.

Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #10

 

[MistyWaters]

I guess for the same reason that many people automatically disbelieve what an investigative journalist writes based on his or her sources when their identities cannot be disclosed. For all I know, some people may be more amenable and willing to talk to a journalist than the police, and so the journalist may have better or more info or even more accurate info than LE!
We know of at least one person who has refused to talk to police. I wonder if he or she has been interviewed by KD?

That’s a reason for someone to refuse to give a statement to police under oath if they have genuine information pertaining to the murders? A reporter cannot testify in Court on their behalf so what does it accomplish to talk to a reporter, then not allowing ones name to be published?

 

[Satchie]

I guess for the same reason that many people automatically disbelieve what an investigative journalist writes based on his or her sources when their identities cannot be disclosed. For all I know, some people may be more amenable and willing to talk to a journalist than the police, and so the journalist may have better or more info or even more accurate info than LE!
We know of at least one person who has refused to talk to police. I wonder if he or she has been interviewed by KD?

IMO, the job of a journalist is to cover a wide range of news stories that inform the public of important current events and issues that affect the public. IMO it is not the job of a journalist to relentlessly focus on one particular ongoing case, which is not even a public interest one, but a purely private one affecting only family and friends.

IMO, the only reason to cover it so intensively is for the sensationalism, for guaranteed click bait, for personal profit to be first in line to publish a hoped for best-seller. In fact, he's so impatient he can't even wait until the crime is solved to publish it.

Since it's all about sensationalism and getting clicks, and getting people to pay to get inside the Star's paywall, the temptation to exaggerate, to sensationalize, is, IMO, irresistible.

So I trust him about as much as I trust the Daily Mail, and other news outlets that are playing that same game of serving up exaggerated sensationalism disguised as journalism.

I will trust a journalist who reports on what is revealed in court if and when perps go to trial. Everything else is just, necessarily, hearsay and opinion published for dubious motives.

JMO

 

[ldlager]

That’s a reason for someone to refuse to give a statement to police under oath if they have genuine information pertaining to the murders? A reporter cannot testify in Court on their behalf so what does it accomplish to talk to a reporter, then not allowing ones name to be published?

I can’t explain why some people would do so. To brag about their “inside” knowledge of the case, or to point KD in a certain direction? Just as I cannot explain why someone wouldn’t agree to speak to LE when requested to do so. And yet this is exactly what has happened.

 

[ldlager]

That’s a reason for someone to refuse to give a statement to police under oath if they have genuine information pertaining to the murders? A reporter cannot testify in Court on their behalf so what does it accomplish to talk to a reporter, then not allowing ones name to be published?

I can’t explain why some people would do so. To brag about their “inside” knowledge of the case, or to point KD in a certain direction? Just as I cannot explain why someone wouldn’t agree to speak to LE when requested to do so. And yet this is exactly what has happened.