Sheri Coleman, sons Garett and Gavin murdered 5-5-09, Columbia, IL. Pt8

[Wrinkles]

Howdy RollinOn86 and everyone,

Just a thought here....It IS possible that she had possibly set up the sites she went to the most with auto logins. ... I just click on Auto Login and then the site I want to login to and it goes to the login page automatically, fills in the login info and VOILA! I'm logged in! OR she may have had the computer "remember passwords" and he would only have had to click on the username and it would supply the password automatically and he could have entered the accounts that way too!

Well, interesting thoughts... True enough, it is possible that Chris could have gone into Facebook from the home computer and made unauthorized (according to Sheri) changes, good thinking. Those changes occurred before Sheri was murdered.

That leads me to wonder if Sheri asked Chris, "Did you go into my Facebook account and make this change?" Surely Sheri knew whether Chris could have or ever did access any of that which she was personally doing online. If she did ask Chris about making a change, I can imagine him denying it -- which then probably made her wonder, "Just how able is this 'threat person' that they could get into my Facebook account." (i.e. did they do that from another computer -- or did they get into my house?) I wish we knew what changes were made and what they might have said or implied. Surely Sheri told someone...

AHA! From this document:

"By interviewing friends, information was obtained that Sheri recently closed her Facebook account because she received threats possibly related to the death threats at her residence. Sheri also reported to friends that there were unauthorized changes to her Facebook account without her knowledge."

Hmmm...she "closed" her account or she "made it private"? When a person closes a Facebook account, is there anything at all accessible for the person? i.e. does a closed Facebook account remain online?

There "was" a Facebook account for Sheri, our sleuthers found that -- how old were the messages on that account or does Facebook mention when an account was originally opened? Was the account we saw an old or new Facebook account for Sheri.

And...the above mentioned document says she closed the account "because she received threats possibly related to the death threats at her residence..." Well now that is a fine "how do you do" eh? The threats were "possibly" related to the "death threats" at her residence. Who knew about those? There were some people who knew (because interviews had people mentioning it), not the least of which was CC (who also had access to the home computer). Just who would have had an interest in continuing the "threatening" situation -- who had an interest in terrorizing Sheri?

In my mind, this points back to one person -- the one who wrote the threats in the first place. I cannot imagine that if friends learned of the threats, that they would harass and try to frighten Sheri by finding away to access her Facebook account and make unauthorized changes -- or do anything else at all to further her fear.

Just thinking about my website online (database software) -- I "think" that the IP address of people logging in to the site is recorded (I'd have to look at my log files, ish!) So...my guess would be that all logins to Sheri's Facebook had an IP address connection to them. My further guess would be that LE will get Facebook logs (those received by SW from a former and/or present account) and that an IP address will be cross-connected to a login to Sheri's account and threats or unauthorized changes (gads am I making sense?)

Now then...just had a real brain whack. What if Sheri had contacted Facebook support, mentioned threats that might have been on her FB (and death threats at home), as well as unauthorized changes and she was waiting to hear back from them after they did some research. What if they emailed her on the 4th of May and said, "Mam, all logins to your account have come from the same IP address -- i.e. yours at home" OR "Mam, we have connected a couple of IP logins to your account from the area around Tampa/St. Pete Florida -- do you know anyone who was there on this or that date?"

WOAH wouldn't that be a wake up call on the day prior to Sheri's murder -- an email from Facebook support telling "from where" a login with threats came or an unauthorized change had been made. Would the FB support crew do this? AND if they did -- what would Sheri do with that information, i.e. "Chris, this is what FB support said -- you were here that day, you were in Tampa that day -- what the h**l is going on here?"

Now then...about logins to delete the deer video, on YouTube... That occurred after Sheri's death. The home computer had been seized by that time, I believe, so any logins to do that deer video deletion would have been made from another computer, yes?

Can or does a person hookup a "fills in the login info and VOILA" from a website that can be accessed from anywhere? i.e. If CC new of this type of login situation of Sheri's (if she had one), could he have accessed it from a computer at his parent's home? Or a laptop he might have had there from work? I mean, could I go to a computer in East Podunk (anywhere in the world with internet access), and login to a site somewhere that would fill in my login info for another site, then go there? If so...has there been an SW that allowed LE to look at logins through that kind of "login to anywhere from here" site?

My guess is that Chris new how to login to that YouTube account and delete that video when someone called him and said, "Bro, take that video down, I'm taking some heat."

 

[Wrinkles]

And how about another thought...

Why no "reward" offered by the grandparents of Gavin and Garett, the parents-in-law of murdered Sheri, from the Coleman side? Or why none from they and all of their friends joining together with them and on their behalf?

If those were my grandchildren and my daughter-in-law murdered and, particularly, if my son was in jail mentioned as the possible murderer, I would be draining my bank accounts or selling anything I had of value to put up for a reward to find the "real murderer" -- that is to say if I didn't already know who the real murderer was.

Mind you, I am not criticizing (not at this moment) the Coleman grandparents of Gavin and Garett, or the parents-in-law of murdered Sheri -- what I am asking is, are they clear about something? Do they know who did this murder? Is that why they are not looking for the murderer by offering a reward? OR are they so sidetracked by thinking about their son who was immediately suspect and who is now in jail and who needs defense money?

If this was you...if you suffered so great a loss as your two grandsons and their mommy, if you felt that your son suffered that loss and was innocent, yet jailed under suspicion of doing the offense, would you a) put money into a reward fund to find the real murderer b) pour all of your resources only into a defense fund for your son c) put money into a reward and defense fund or d) do nothing?

I feel particularly clear about why Sheri's family is not putting up a reward. I am absolutely unclear about the Coleman family -- I just don't get it.

My ex DIL has terribly injured my grandchildren (her children) and my son (they are divorced.) Even so, my grandchildren love their mommy -- if she were murdered, I would be doing something for the sake of my grandchildren to find her murderer. IF my ex DIL AND my grandchildren had been murdered together, I would not be able to rest until the murderer were found.

So... I just don't get this except that IF I knew that my own son murdered his wife and my grandchildren, I might take another path... I am not in those shoes, so don't know the path I would take -- but it might be to not offer a refund to find the real murderer.

 

[waterlooinspector]

And how about another thought...

Why no "reward" offered by the grandparents of Gavin and Garett, the parents-in-law of murdered Sheri, from the Coleman side? Or why none from they and all of their friends joining together with them and on their behalf?

If those were my grandchildren and my daughter-in-law murdered and, particularly, if my son was in jail mentioned as the possible murderer, I would be draining my bank accounts or selling anything I had of value to put up for a reward to find the "real murderer" -- that is to say if I didn't already know who the real murderer was.

Mind you, I am not criticizing (not at this moment) the Coleman grandparents of Gavin and Garett, or the parents-in-law of murdered Sheri -- what I am asking is, are they clear about something? Do they know who did this murder? Is that why they are not looking for the murderer by offering a reward? OR are they so sidetracked by thinking about their son who was immediately suspect and who is now in jail and who needs defense money?

If this was you...if you suffered so great a loss as your two grandsons and their mommy, if you felt that your son suffered that loss and was innocent, yet jailed under suspicion of doing the offense, would you a) put money into a reward fund to find the real murderer b) pour all of your resources only into a defense fund for your son c) put money into a reward and defense fund or d) do nothing?

I feel particularly clear about why Sheri's family is not putting up a reward. I am absolutely unclear about the Coleman family -- I just don't get it.

My ex DIL has terribly injured my grandchildren (her children) and my son (they are divorced.) Even so, my grandchildren love their mommy -- if she were murdered, I would be doing something for the sake of my grandchildren to find her murderer. IF my ex DIL AND my grandchildren had been murdered together, I would not be able to rest until the murderer were found.

So... I just don't get this except that IF I knew that my own son murdered his wife and my grandchildren, I might take another path... I am not in those shoes, so don't know the path I would take -- but it might be to not offer a refund to find the real murderer.

Well....CC and the Coleman clain are not as smart as OJ....Their PR during this entire ordeal was just plain stupid

 

[WestSideGal]

No, she lives at another address. Remember I said there was a house on Southwick ... that is supposedly where the Coleman's lived before ....but the transaction dates that WestSideGal gave match up to a different address ... totally different street, that Meyer's daughter and husband live in.

The house I found in Affton is on Fawnhaven. I got this from the former neighbor identified as Tina Houska in this PD article:

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...E3D3A51987E00AF8862575AD004CF008?OpenDocument

From her name, I looked up her address which is on Fawnhaven. Then I looked up other properties on Fawnhaven. The house formerly owned by JMM is across the street from the Houska's. The sale and transaction dates I listed were for this house. Since the current owner's name is out there now, here's a link to the tax records:

http://revenue.stlouisco.com/ias/

 

[analytical]

If there were a pending divorce or a divorce had been filed for, at least the original petition should be in the court record.

According to SLPD, May 5, 2009 "A check of records kept by the Monroe County clerk's office found no pending cases involving the couple."

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...E3D3A51987E00AF8862575AD004CF008?OpenDocument

 

[WestSideGal]

The house I found in Affton is on Fawnhaven. I got this from the former neighbor identified as Tina Houska in this PD article:

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...E3D3A51987E00AF8862575AD004CF008?OpenDocument

From her name, I looked up her address which is on Fawnhaven. Then I looked up other properties on Fawnhaven. The house formerly owned by JMM is across the street from the Houska's. The sale and transaction dates I listed were for this house. Since the current owner's name is out there now, here's a link to the tax records:

http://revenue.stlouisco.com/ias/

Sorry to quote myself but wanted to add that at the time I posted the sale dates, I did not want to disclose the current owner's name. I did not realize that Sandra was JM's daughter. I also posted that it was owner occupied and not a rental because the property address and taxing address were the same. Normally, if it is a rental, the taxing address would be different. Sorry if I confused anyone!

 

[fran]

If there were a pending divorce or a divorce had been filed for, at least the original petition should be in the court record.

According to SLPD, May 5, 2009 "A check of records kept by the Monroe County clerk's office found no pending cases involving the couple."

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...E3D3A51987E00AF8862575AD004CF008?OpenDocument

Which proves that Chris Coleman was lying to his g/f TL.:liar:

Can't say I find this as a surprise. :doh:

JMHO
fran

 

[Wrinkles]

Greetings WaterlooInspector and all,

Well....CC and the Coleman clain are not as smart as OJ....Their PR during this entire ordeal was just plain stupid

You know it really makes my heart ache to think of the whole thing... In order to say to myself, "What would I do if I were in their shoes" -- I can hardly even go there, I don't even want to imagine being in those shoes -- God forbid. I wouldn't wish their situation on my worst enemy.

I believe that, earlier, some posters mentioned some examples of what they thought was acceptable behavior -- I believe they felt that the Hacking family handled their situation about as aptly as such a thing could be handled. Can anyone remind me of their example?

It has been mentioned that the Coleman family didn't contact Sheri's family -- if they had, what would have been the appropriate words to write or speak? I would be so confused, so broken, I would be terrorized to say too little or say too much, just not knowing the right words to speak -- I would not want to injure them in the least. I would not want to overstep or understep my bounds. What is the greater error, to say too little, to say too much, or to say nothing at all? In the meanwhile, I would be in so much pain myself -- I would hardly trust myself to do anything right.

It has been mentioned that Sheri's family was not asked what they would like of Sheri and the children's belongings. If you were a parent of an adult child who indicated they were innocent, and if they said, "Absolutely not -- I don't want to be in touch with anyone, I'm doing this myself, with or without your help. I don't want to talk to anymore people -- I don't want to go through anymore emotional stress." IF a person were innocent, anger can be a huge part of grieving -- if the adult child was angry at everyone in their grief, what would you do?

If you thought your adult child's actions were out of order, what would you do? What would you say? Would you call Sheri's family and say, "We do not agree with what he is doing?" You cannot force your adult child to do what you think is reasonable, you can talk to them -- you can back off and not support them, but if you thought they were acting out in their grief, what would you do?

Then again, what if you felt that, despite your child saying they were innocent, you truly felt they were not. Would you step into the middle of it -- would you take action or shut up, knowing that anything you do could make matters far worse than they already were?

To be quite honest, I am at a complete loss -- I can't put myself in those people's shoes. And I go back to the thought... If my DIL and my grandchildren were slain, I "think" that I would be doing everything and anything to gather a reward fund to find their murderer, particularly if my son had been jailed as the only suspect and I felt that he was innocent. But if I felt that he was innocent and would never get proper representation from a public defender, would I put all of my effort into helping him get adequate counsel? Would I split my effort? OR would I look at a very ill wife (as in the case of RC) and say, I am going to do my best to keep her life as quiet and peaceful as possible -- and this is a case where I must just shutup and let God do the entire thing.

I have read many wise people in WS... I would love to read everyone's wisdoms on this. And where is my above thinking wrong? I am curious about that too?

 

[FOXTERRIER]

I was camping this weekend & ran into an old highschool friend that is a teacher where the boys went to school. She told me something I hadn't heard & thought I'd share it with my webslueth buds. A lot of the kids at school had put together a very special memorial in tribute to Garrett & Gavin & had it displayed at the funeral in Chester. Can you believe that Chris THREW THAT MEMORIAL AWAY when the funeral was done. Another thing was mentioned that I really don't want to type, but it's eating away at me & I have no understanding (as with everything else with this case) as to why he would wrap his son's in saran wrap. This was just speculation, but I think I remember reading this before in one of the earlier threads.

 

[Wrinkles]

Hello FoxTerrier,

...

Another thing was mentioned that I really don't want to type, but it's eating away at me & I have no understanding (as with everything else with this case) as to why he would wrap his son's in saran wrap. This was just speculation, but I think I remember reading this before in one of the earlier threads.

Huh? Saran Wrap? I have no recall of Saran Wrap mentioned in this case, what did I miss, and are you talking about something after the children were deceased or something he did while they were alive?

Help us with this ... I am struggling with it.

 

[Juliana]

I was camping this weekend & ran into an old highschool friend that is a teacher where the boys went to school. She told me something I hadn't heard & thought I'd share it with my webslueth buds. A lot of the kids at school had put together a very special memorial in tribute to Garrett & Gavin & had it displayed at the funeral in Chester. Can you believe that Chris THREW THAT MEMORIAL AWAY when the funeral was done. Another thing was mentioned that I really don't want to type, but it's eating away at me & I have no understanding (as with everything else with this case) as to why he would wrap his son's in saran wrap. This was just speculation, but I think I remember reading this before in one of the earlier threads.

I don't recall anything about saran wrap but early in the case we heard (not sure if it was verified) that the killer put something on the boys and there was speculation that it was spray paint. Can't recall if it was a rumor or a news source. This is so sick. imo

 

[Wrinkles]

Holy Smokes,

I just googled "saran wrap" and "coleman" -- and WS had already been googled for this. WOAH!

I can't find anything else, yet.

 

[FOXTERRIER]

Maybe I read it on the STLtoday comment board, but either way, it was mentioned that the boys were wrapped in saran wrap and that they were found that way. I don't know if it's true and I don't know if it was before or after they were killed.

 

[Vegas Bride]

Greetings WaterlooInspector and all,



You know it really makes my heart ache to think of the whole thing... In order to say to myself, "What would I do if I were in their shoes" -- I can hardly even go there, I don't even want to imagine being in those shoes -- God forbid. I wouldn't wish their situation on my worst enemy.

I believe that, earlier, some posters mentioned some examples of what they thought was acceptable behavior -- I believe they felt that the Hacking family handled their situation about as aptly as such a thing could be handled. Can anyone remind me of their example?

It has been mentioned that the Coleman family didn't contact Sheri's family -- if they had, what would have been the appropriate words to write or speak? I would be so confused, so broken, I would be terrorized to say too little or say too much, just not knowing the right words to speak -- I would not want to injure them in the least. I would not want to overstep or understep my bounds. What is the greater error, to say too little, to say too much, or to say nothing at all? In the meanwhile, I would be in so much pain myself -- I would hardly trust myself to do anything right.

It has been mentioned that Sheri's family was not asked what they would like of Sheri and the children's belongings. If you were a parent of an adult child who indicated they were innocent, and if they said, "Absolutely not -- I don't want to be in touch with anyone, I'm doing this myself, with or without your help. I don't want to talk to anymore people -- I don't want to go through anymore emotional stress." IF a person were innocent, anger can be a huge part of grieving -- if the adult child was angry at everyone in their grief, what would you do?

If you thought your adult child's actions were out of order, what would you do? What would you say? Would you call Sheri's family and say, "We do not agree with what he is doing?" You cannot force your adult child to do what you think is reasonable, you can talk to them -- you can back off and not support them, but if you thought they were acting out in their grief, what would you do?

Then again, what if you felt that, despite your child saying they were innocent, you truly felt they were not. Would you step into the middle of it -- would you take action or shut up, knowing that anything you do could make matters far worse than they already were?

To be quite honest, I am at a complete loss -- I can't put myself in those people's shoes. And I go back to the thought... If my DIL and my grandchildren were slain, I "think" that I would be doing everything and anything to gather a reward fund to find their murderer, particularly if my son had been jailed as the only suspect and I felt that he was innocent. But if I felt that he was innocent and would never get proper representation from a public defender, would I put all of my effort into helping him get adequate counsel? Would I split my effort? OR would I look at a very ill wife (as in the case of RC) and say, I am going to do my best to keep her life as quiet and peaceful as possible -- and this is a case where I must just shutup and let God do the entire thing.

I have read many wise people in WS... I would love to read everyone's wisdoms on this. And where is my above thinking wrong? I am curious about that too?

Since CC's father is a minister Imo he would have some experience in how to comfort someone in their time of grief. SC'c family lost their daughter and their grandchildren! The families had a mutual loss with losing the grandchildren and Imo it would be the natural thing to reach out to the ones who would be sharing in your pain.
They would not have to be talking about who they felt was or was not guilty, they could have just talked about how much they loved these family members who were taken away and talk about what they meant to them.

None of my family lives close to me, if something were to happen and I was killed, I just can not picture my dh and his family not contacting members of my family and reaching out to them, it would be one of the very first things that would be done, when you have a crisis, you want to reach out to other people. You do not avoid phone calls and force a family to have to take things to court so they can have a funeral.

VB

 

[fran]

IIRC, in the Hacking case, his parents reached out to Lori's family, they attended her services and spoke out about their son. Here's a link which kind of gives a brief outline. Mark was arrested prior to Lori's funeral, yet his parents STILL attended and I believe they spoke to Lori's family.

http://www.tabloidcolumn.com/lori-hacking.html

To be quite honest, I personally do feel Mark was and is mentally unstable. His lies and made-up life were most likely the result of his unsound mind. Unfortunately, his demented mind took him to murder his beautiful and young wife who was pregnant with his own child.

Such a sad, sad case. But then, aren't they all?

JMHO
fran

 

[Kip]

I was camping this weekend & ran into an old highschool friend that is a teacher where the boys went to school. She told me something I hadn't heard & thought I'd share it with my webslueth buds. A lot of the kids at school had put together a very special memorial in tribute to Garrett & Gavin & had it displayed at the funeral in Chester. Can you believe that Chris THREW THAT MEMORIAL AWAY when the funeral was done. Another thing was mentioned that I really don't want to type, but it's eating away at me & I have no understanding (as with everything else with this case) as to why he would wrap his son's in saran wrap. This was just speculation, but I think I remember reading this before in one of the earlier threads.

Yes, some of the Coleman neighbors discussed this in the St Louis Today comments section. CC's parents were standing there watching as he did it. There was a discussion amongst the neighbors as to whether it would be appropriate to retrieve it from the trash. But the trash was emptied before they came to any decision.

It does seem callous to throw it away. Though I don't think I would want to throw a memorial to my children away, I honestly don't know how I'd be reacting in that situation.

 

[fran]

I was camping this weekend & ran into an old highschool friend that is a teacher where the boys went to school. She told me something I hadn't heard & thought I'd share it with my webslueth buds. A lot of the kids at school had put together a very special memorial in tribute to Garrett & Gavin & had it displayed at the funeral in Chester. Can you believe that Chris THREW THAT MEMORIAL AWAY when the funeral was done. Another thing was mentioned that I really don't want to type, but it's eating away at me & I have no understanding (as with everything else with this case) as to why he would wrap his son's in saran wrap. This was just speculation, but I think I remember reading this before in one of the earlier threads.

FWIW, I too read that about the siran wrap, but because it wasn't from official sources and it sounds so bizarre, I thought I'd wait before mentioning it.

As for Chris destroying the memorial tribute by the boy's school friends, well, I just have no words. I don't understand that at all. Of course, I'm at a loss for this entire crime. To slowly strangle not only your wife, but each of your young children as well, {shaking head in dismay}, I'll never get it.

It must be the same reason that Chris couldn't go in the house after the murders either. He probably hears the sounds of his young son's life draining with their last breath, every time he sees their images.


fran

PS.........I hope that each day during his trial, the pros has a big 15X20 portrait of each of the victims for the jury and Chris to see.........He'll feel as if his family has a front row seat. Maybe he'd even go stark-raving mad by the end of trial.grrr...imho, I really don't give a fig what happens to him at this point, just that he pays for what he did! fran

OK, that is IF he did this and IF he's found guilty. :angel:

 

[impatientredhead]

One more possible factor behind CC murdering the boys: he wouldn't want to be reminded of Sheri, and if he truly was going to marry Tara, she wouldn't want to be reminded of her friend that she betrayed.

I think that is trying to apply normal emotion to a sociopathic situation. Neither of them felt any guilt about Sheri. She felt entitled to get involved with her husband and he felt entitled to do anything he wanted including killing her and her children. IMO that was not motivated by not wanting to have a guilty conscience when he looked at the boys.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

I find it beyond disturbing that CC tossed every single memorial given to his dead family into the trash. After the funeral and the ones left outside of the home. Who does that??? Secondly, I do not care which side of the family you belong to. For CC's family (goes without saying concerning CC himself) not to contact Sheri's family is just simply wrong on every possible level. Seriously, this was their daughter and their grandsons! There is something very, very wrong with the dynamics here. If RC and et al decide not to discuss anything with the media, they have that right. However, morally, ethically, and with empathy/compassion they should have not even thought twice contacting Sheri's family. And, this Coleman family (preacher, no less) are considered respected Christians???

Twisted.....

 

[OrdinaryLife]

I think that is trying to apply normal emotion to a sociopathic situation. Neither of them felt any guilt about Sheri. She felt entitled to get involved with her husband and he felt entitled to do anything he wanted including killing her and her children. IMO that was not motivated by not wanting to have a guilty conscience when he looked at the boys.

I agree that you cannot apply the "normal rules of emotion" to a sociopath. They simply do not think, feel, or behave as a normal person does. However, I can't agree regarding TL until we all learn a bit more about her. We know very, very little about this woman though it may become more open once June 10th is here and we learn more from this day at Court.

imvho