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

[deugirtni]

What I think is sort of fascinating is Warmington doesn’t name the Senior Police Officer. If this person was speaking on behalf of TPS and was involved in the early investigation and if Warmington knew who this officer is, what’s the reason Warmington doesn’t outrightly prove Saunders wrong?

And what exactly is a “Senior” Police Officer, in an organization where title by rank is the practise? The thing is, it’s not as if the media (nor the public) has a TPS directory listing the name and rank of every officer to double check a police source, on the off chance one of them decides to leak confidential information.

Or did Warmington receive an anonymous email or phone call from someone only claiming they were a Senior Police officer, which TPS has no control over. But if someone was impersonating a police officer in their contact with the media, that’s a crime whether or not the individual’s motive is also directly connected to the actual homicides.

So maybe Warmington took the opportunity to let it publicly slip, this questionable source - this person who knows who they are might be sweating a little bit maybe?

I doubt if Warmington would change his story on the say-so of some anonymous random 'senior officer' who had contacted him, and Warmington's ethics would not allow him to disclose the identity of his source, even though it may lead to some answers. He likely said 'senior officer', instead of listing the rank, just to further prevent possibility of identification. Whoever it was, I get the impression that Warmington trusted his opinion. Who knows what information he was privy to at the time though? I think Satchie is correct in that everyone was getting caught up in wanting to be first out with the big news of the day. Unfortunately it was at the expense of a victim's reputation, and TPS won't own the error and tell us why they thought M/S, nor what it was after 6 weeks, that made them confident enough to make their declaration. The thought of someone impersonating is a possibility, which is why I wondered above if Warmington has had followup contact with that same person, to clarify why/how, etc. things got so mixed up. (I'm sure he has??)

 

[deugirtni]

It would sure be massively interesting if we were to find out that all of these leaks came from one 'source'?

 

[MistyWaters]

I doubt if Warmington would change his story on the say-so of some anonymous random 'senior officer' who had contacted him, and Warmington's ethics would not allow him to disclose the identity of his source, even though it may lead to some answers. He likely said 'senior officer', instead of listing the rank, just to further prevent possibility of identification. Whoever it was, I get the impression that Warmington trusted his opinion. Who knows what information he was privy to at the time though? I think Satchie is correct in that everyone was getting caught up in wanting to be first out with the big news of the day. Unfortunately it was at the expense of a victim's reputation, and TPS won't own the error and tell us why they thought M/S, nor what it was after 6 weeks, that made them confident enough to make their declaration. The thought of someone impersonating is a possibility, which is why I wondered above if Warmington has had followup contact with that same person, to clarify why/how, etc. things got so mixed up. (I'm sure he has??)

The media has fought long and hard for the right to rely on anonymous sources but they’re not required to verify the information they receive is factual, nor will the identity of who passes information always be known. It’s the nature of the business.

Journalists’ anonymous sources to be protected under new federal law

 

[JayFriend]

What I think is sort of fascinating is Warmington doesn’t name the Senior Police Officer. If this person was speaking on behalf of TPS and was involved in the early investigation and if Warmington knew who this officer is, what’s the reason Warmington doesn’t outrightly prove Saunders wrong?

It should be quite obvious that the TPS insider feeding Warmington information is a confidential source. Revealing the source would be both unethical and career compromising to the source and clearly nobody would ever confide any inside information to this reporter again.

 

[matou]

Wow. These murderers must know what their doing to have people in and out of the house for at least one full day while the victims were in the house. Even with a new lawyer, private investigators and rewards, no evidence that this case is going anywhere.

 

[WINDSOR]

Most times elderly couples are found dead together and there are no signs of violence or mayhem or forced entry, many individual police officers based on experience assume it is a murder-suicide and will likely describe it that way to others.
The Sherman crime scene fit this scenario and I believe many police officers and other interested parties jumped to the conclusion of a murder-suicide. If some 'senior' police officer was speaking to a reporter, he would have likely stated his opinion of M/S and the reporter would have published the story with that conclusion.
All this talk and discussion of a flip-flop by the TPS, secret sources, a cover-up of a M/S and so on, based on some cop saying it was M/S (off-the record); to my thinking is pointless.

 

[MistyWaters]

It should be quite obvious that the TPS insider feeding Warmington information is a confidential source. Revealing the source would be both unethical and career compromising to the source and clearly nobody would ever confide any inside information to this reporter again.

I think Warmington has been around the block more than a time or two. Any reporter know a police officer isn’t allowed to touch the scene when deaths are deemed “suspicious”. Their role is to protect the bodies and the crime scene to ensure everything is undisturbed, while waiting for the coroner and forensic pathologists to arrive. Prior to the autopsy, which certainly wasn’t completed in the Sherman residence, no police officer would’ve been able to determine either the cause or manner of death by visual observation, the same day the bodies were discovered.

My theory is the source was not a police officer and both TPS and the media intentionally allowed the fabricated story to unfold until the official double homicide announcement but why, I’ll leave it at that. Other than to say during investigations of staged homicides, obviously the murderer/s intended the deaths to be perceived that way. Even if LE knew better, there’s no immediate benefit for LE to show their hand.

 

[MistyWaters]

Most times elderly couples are found dead together and there are no signs of violence or mayhem or forced entry, many individual police officers based on experience assume it is a murder-suicide and will likely describe it that way to others.
The Sherman crime scene fit this scenario and I believe many police officers and other interested parties jumped to the conclusion of a murder-suicide. If some 'senior' police officer was speaking to a reporter, he would have likely stated his opinion of M/S and the reporter would have published the story with that conclusion.
All this talk and discussion of a flip-flop by the TPS, secret sources, a cover-up of a M/S and so on, based on some cop saying it was M/S (off-the record); to my thinking is pointless.

Although the media serves the general public by providing us with news, confidentiality within any police force is a really big deal.

Police Officers are all required to sign confidentiality agreements. If any officer breaks that agreement by anonymously leaking confidential information to the media, what’s to prevent him or her from leaking confidential information to suspects who are under investigation?

Who knows, maybe one of the recent subpoenas the Judge approved is to discover the identity of Warmington’s anonymous police source?

“The newly passed bill, which is still awaiting royal assent, will amend the Criminal Code so only a Superior Court judge can issue search warrants for journalistic sources. It will also update the Canada Evidence Act to protect the anonymity of sources. Until royal assent is given, judges in lower courts are able to grant warrants to police to access journalists’ sources.

Deltell says the new rules will protect both journalists and police.

“We are protecting whistleblowers, but at the same time, we are also protecting police officers, who need to do their due diligence,” he said in September.”
Journalists’ anonymous sources to be protected under new federal law

 

[ABro]

The media has fought long and hard for the right to rely on anonymous sources but they’re not required to verify the information they receive is factual, nor will the identity of who passes information always be known. It’s the nature of the business.

Journalists’ anonymous sources to be protected under new federal law

Um. Wrong. If the information is not factual they can be sued and face a world of pain.

Also there is no journalistic shield law in Canada so they can in some cases be compelled to reveal sources or sent to jail.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4036641

 

[MistyWaters]

WARMINGTON: Tips on Sherman murders pouring in

“...As smart as they are, they must be careful. Saunders was very clear Friday he was cognizant that the killer or killers could be listening to everything he and they are saying.

But the good news is so are people they are close to and $10-million can solve some riddles.

Clearly irritated at the news conference, flanked with former Homicide detectives Tommy Klatt, Mike Davis, Ray Zarb and Brian Dalrymple, Greenspan was more upbeat on Tuesday — saying he was “pleased” with the response to the appeal....”

 

[ABro]

Um. Wrong. If the information is not factual they can be sued and face a world of pain.

Also there is no pure journalistic shield law in Canada so they can in some cases be compelled to reveal sources or sent to jail as the article you cite makes clear.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4036641

 

[MistyWaters]

Um. Wrong. If the information is not factual they can be sued and face a world of pain.

Also there is no journalistic shield law in Canada so they can in some cases be compelled to reveal sources or sent to jail.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4036641

Not according to this article -
“Shapiro explained that anonymous sources carry a greater risk of lying, or manipulating reporters and editors.

“If the information turns out to be false or misleading in some way, [readers] can’t go back to the source,” he said, noting there is a lack of accountability for the source.

He said the question is this: “Does the benefit of running this outweigh the harm it does potentially to media trust?”.......

......“The Canadian Association of Journalists spells out similar ethics for using anonymous sources, namely, being as transparent as possible.”
Anonymous sources — why media outlets use them, and why it’s not ‘phony’ or ‘fake news’

 

[human]

There are something like 50,000 realtors registered at the Toronto Real Estate Board, and this guy was merely one of them - he was Asian and had a language barrier, and wouldn't have known what was what, and likely hadn't been inside the home before that time. His clients were superstitious and felt it was like a bad omen to come across these bodies. Sounds like this episode lost him his clients, as one of the articles states that his buyers went on to purchase a property through a different agent.

""It was a couple of days later," he said, when he learned from the news that the Shermans were actually dead.

"It was scary," he recalled.

His clients were upset, too, after finding out what they'd really seen.

"They were angry," he recalled. The agent described them as being from mainland China and superstitious. They worried witnessing such a sight was a harbinger of bad things to come.
....
"The agent says he and his clients thought they had stumbled across some kind bizarre Halloween display or a joke.

"Fake murders," is how he initially described it.

They soon left the property, refusing to believe what they saw inside the multimillion-dollar home could actually be real.
....
The agent believes the couple has been encountering health issues, but has since purchased another home in Toronto through a different agent."

Family of Barry and Honey Sherman offers reward of up to $10M for information about killings | CBC News

Wow! Sounds like a huge mess!

Not good. Sounds ridiculous

 

[ABro]

How exactly does any of that back up your point?

You seem to think journalists shouldn’t use anonymous sources.

But no one uses anonymous sources as a first choice. And believe me, journalists are well aware of the risks involved and not immune to them.

There's a case before the Supreme Court right now. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4674622

As Much as people on this board are clutching their pearls over use of anonymous sources in the Sherman case, those sources have shed light on what’s going on.

Without them you would know nothing. Do you think that would be better? I don’t.

 

[MistyWaters]

Lawyer divulging details of how Sherman bodies were found could impact case: Saunders

“....At an Oct. 26 news conference, lawyer Brian Greenspan said the bodies, discovered in the couple’s North York home on Old Colony Road on Dec. 15, 2017, were found in a “suspicious and staged manner.”

He said the two were “sitting next to each other, with ligatures pulled up around their necks and wrapped around a railing, forcing them into an upright position.” Greenspan added that “Barry Sherman’s legs were outstretched with one crossed over the other in a passive manner, wearing his undisturbed eyeglasses and his jacket pulled slightly behind his back, which would have prevented use of his arms.”

The apparent details of how the bodies were found were not made available to the public previously, a fact that Saunders said could have an impact on the investigation.

“The more information you give out to the public, it taints your investigation,” Saunders said. “So now certain things are said and out there in public domain and the next witness comes in and starts talking about those things … it makes it harder from a credibility perspective to make it authentic.”

 

[MistyWaters]

How exactly does any of that back up your point?

You seem to think journalists shouldn’t use anonymous sources.

But no one uses anonymous sources as a first choice. And believe me, journalists are well aware of the risks involved and not immune to them.

There's a case before the Supreme Court right now. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4674622

As Much as people on this board are clutching their pearls over use of anonymous sources in the Sherman case, those sources have shed light on what’s going on.

Without them you would know nothing. Do you think that would be better? I don’t.

Journalists obviously use anonymous sources, whether they do or not doesn’t matter to me. I think most everyone knows if a source refuses to allow the media to reveal their identity, their information isn’t always reliable.

 

[ABro]

Lawyer divulging details of how Sherman bodies were found could impact case: Saunders

“....At an Oct. 26 news conference, lawyer Brian Greenspan said the bodies, discovered in the couple’s North York home on Old Colony Road on Dec. 15, 2017, were found in a “suspicious and staged manner.”

He said the two were “sitting next to each other, with ligatures pulled up around their necks and wrapped around a railing, forcing them into an upright position.” Greenspan added that “Barry Sherman’s legs were outstretched with one crossed over the other in a passive manner, wearing his undisturbed eyeglasses and his jacket pulled slightly behind his back, which would have prevented use of his arms.”

The apparent details of how the bodies were found were not made available to the public previously, a fact that Saunders said could have an impact on the investigation.

“The more information you give out to the public, it taints your investigation,” Saunders said. “So now certain things are said and out there in public domain and the next witness comes in and starts talking about those things … it makes it harder from a credibility perspective to make it authentic.”

Of course Saunders is going to say that. He doesn’t want to be criticized.

Toronto police are one of the most secretive police forces there is and they have botched several big cases recently.

You know that thanks to the media yet you seem to want to shut the media up.

 

[ABro]

Journalists obviously use anonymous sources, whether they do or not doesn’t matter to me. I think most everyone knows if a source refuses to allow the media to reveal their identity, their information isn’t always reliable.

Yes but you whole point seems to be that it’s NEVER reliable. In fact, in the Sherman investigation, almost all of the information from anon sources WAS reliable.

Every detail you had about the crime scene was from anon sources and only confirmed last Friday by Brian Greenspan. Nothing official from police beyond that they were strangled.

 

[MistyWaters]

Of course Saunders is going to say that. He doesn’t want to be criticized.

Toronto police are one of the most secretive police forces there is and they have botched several big cases recently.

You know that thanks to the media yet you seem to want to shut the media up.

Pardon me? I’m merely an interested observer following this case. If you’ve followed these threads you’ll find examples of various contractory media reports from “anonymous sources” and they cannot all be factual. It is what it is.

 

[ABro]

Pardon me? I’m merely an interested observer following this case. If you’ve followed these threads you’ll find examples of various contractory media reports from “anonymous sources” and they cannot all be factual. It is what it is.

Of course there are contradictions. And if you go to court and a trial there will Still be contradictions. That’s how it works. This isn’t a TV show. Real life is full of contradictions.

Anon sources that you want silenced, based on your comments, are the source of almost all the knowledge about the crime scene that we have.

You spend a lot of time splitting hairs when it’s the big picture that’s important.

Why were Barry and Honey Sherman hanging by the pool?