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

[JDG]

The pain went far beyond the loss of their parents. The were placed with an abusive foster family and their cousin abandoned them while he stole the only future they had. Born to what should have been a very promising lives, Kerry ended up drug addicted, and his brother ended up dead. Funny how peoples interpretations of these kids has been skewed to that of ungrateful leaches, while Barry has the public of being a generous philanthropist.

According to ALL articles, they were NOT fostered, they were adopted into a very wealthy, prestigious family. Two of the 'orphans' even took the family name and use it today. Two didnt. KW and DW.

Very lucky Id think. People do not adopt children without loving children greatly.
The family also adopted two other children who are close to them today.

I've read about both the drug problems, no one forces drugs upon you.
Its a lifestyle choice, often. If its not a choice, its a criminal concern.

 

[deugirtni]

The pain went far beyond the loss of their parents. The were placed with an abusive foster family and their cousin abandoned them while he stole the only future they had. Born to what should have been a very promising lives, Kerry ended up drug addicted, and his brother ended up dead. Funny how peoples interpretations of these kids has been skewed to that of ungrateful leaches, while Barry has the public of being a generous philanthropist.

Funny how people can go around accusing the respected ADOPTIVE family of being abusive. I'm sure they appreciate that. With NO proof, only the say-so of a disgruntled human, on many fronts.
Funny how Barry bought the business for 1/3 more than it was worth, and yet he is accused of stealing from the orphans. I should say... continues to be accused of stealing from the orphans, even though it has been proven otherwise in courts, and on appeal.
I guess that could be how perception comes to be, that some are ungrateful leaches. Nothing funny about that though.
I should also remind that this 'foster family' who actually adopted all four of the children so they could remain all together, and whom wouldn't have received a red cent for doing so.. or for their ongoing care.. was the choice of the orphans' own mother, because she too was afraid that someone would take from her family what was not rightfully theirs. Even though she had a close blood relative who WANTED to take on the responsibility of raising her four children after her death.
This is just the saddest story ever, all around, from every angle. But not for exactly the reasons that are being portrayed. imo.

 

[William_60]

The pain went far beyond the loss of their parents. The were placed with an abusive foster family and their cousin abandoned them while he stole the only future they had. Born to what should have been a very promising lives, Kerry ended up drug addicted, and his brother ended up dead. Funny how peoples interpretations of these kids has been skewed to that of ungrateful leaches, while Barry has the public of being a generous philanthropist.

According to the 2007 Toronto Life story, a chance meeting with a fellow named Stan Garden is what brought the four boys into Sherman's life.

Kerry was 27, then.

The relationship - 11 years running - was apparently fine until 1999, when Jeffrey delved into history, the sale of Empire, etc.

That opened a veritable Pandora's Box of ill will, IMO. Kerry was 38.

If these points are correct, it seems unreasonable to me to lay the boys' struggles squarely at Sherman's feet.

The loss of the parents is where The Hurt, a river of pain, can be found.

 

[deugirtni]

How old was Barry at the deathof the parents? Didn’t the mother make it clear who she thought was unworthy of having anything to do with her children?

How coukd Barry have stopped the drug use? What did he have to do with their downfall as teens?

Financially, the money would have gone down a rat hole. They with their drug history probably would have never been allowed near a drug manufacturing facility.

Would regulators allow it?

Good point human. I'm pretty sure in a place such as Apotex, one might have to provide a criminal record check, a drug test, and perhaps be subject to random drug testing.

But of course.. weren't the orphans or one of them quoted in MSM saying that if they had known they were entitled to 20% of the company, they may have chosen not to get into illicit drug use? There is always always someone to blame. Isn't there?

 

[deugirtni]

I think it is mostly always forgotten that the actual terminology stated that AFTER two years of employment at Apotex, each orphan would be entitled to PURCHASE FIVE percent of ISSUED stock. But.. that gets turned around too, into... entitled to 20% of Apotex.

 

[MistyWaters]

According to ALL articles, they were NOT fostered, they were adopted into a very wealthy, prestigious family. Two of the 'orphans' even took the family name and use it today. Two didnt. KW and DW.

Very lucky Id think. People do not adopt children without loving children greatly.
The family also adopted two other children who are close to them today.

I've read about both the drug problems, no one forces drugs upon you.
Its a lifestyle choice, often. If its not a choice, its a criminal concern.

I agree. If it wasn’t for the fact it’s been published KW was born in 1961 so he’s 57 years old, just reading about him pointing the fingers of blame for circumstances following the death of his parents onto both Barry Sherman and his adoptive parents I would guess he’d hardly passed adolescence. If the adoptive family were abusive, I have no doubt he would’ve filed a lawsuit against them as well.

 

[deugirtni]

Perhaps he did. I'm not sure if those types of things are public?

 

[dotr]

2017 rbbm
How Barry Sherman built his multibillion-dollar fortune

"Kerry Winter admits that for many years Sherman was “like a surrogate dad and I was like an adopted son.” Now, perhaps because he feels most betrayed, he leads his family litigation and, going against his legal advice, feeds stories to the press."

"Later, when I spoke with Rockcliffe, he complained that the reporter had omitted a crucial qualifier: “Perhaps if I’d had their terrible start in life, I’d think differently.” Rockcliffe has his own reason to dislike what he calls “Barry’s cold heart.” Forty-three years ago, when they shared a limo at Beverley’s funeral, Rockcliffe said it would be a shame if the Orphan Children were adopted separately. Sherman’s reply, he claims, was, “So what? Worse things could happen.” Rockcliffe says he can’t forgive him."
"Will Barry settle? Not likely. He’s a lion, a stranger to the notion of compromise."

 

[William_60]

I think it is mostly always forgotten that the actual terminology stated that AFTER two years of employment at Apotex, each orphan would be entitled to PURCHASE FIVE percent of ISSUED stock. But.. that gets turned around too, into... entitled to 20% of Apotex.

And...Empire's profits were dropping when Barry purchased it.

IIRC, they had dropped from 1 M to $800,000 while in the hands of Royal Trust and lawyers.

(Ironically...20 per cent)

It wasn't a plug'n'play business. It wasn't the Carleton Street Cashbox.

 

[Lexiintoronto]

An excerpt of Kerry Winter on the Fifth Estate. He posted here afterwards that he was considered to be a suspect, although LE hasn’t confirmed that.

 

[MistyWaters]

According to the 2007 Toronto Life story, a chance meeting with a fellow named Stan Garden is what brought the four boys into Sherman's life.

Kerry was 27, then.

The relationship - 11 years running - was apparently fine until 1999, when Jeffrey delved into history, the sale of Empire, etc.

That opened a veritable Pandora's Box of ill will, IMO. Kerry was 38.

If these points are correct, it seems unreasonable to me to lay the boys' struggles squarely at Sherman's feet.

The loss of the parents is where The Hurt, a river of pain, can be found.

Even though Kerry (b.61) has publicly directed his self-proclaimed victimization toward his cousin Barry (b.’42) the “other side of the story” including that from siblings of each KWs birth parents or his other cousins, or his birth brothers, or his adoptive brothers or other adoptive relatives is noticeably absent.

Silence throughout the entire span of failed lawsuit and up to this very day.... I’ve wondered why that is, particularly following the murders when he placed himself in the all-knowing spotlight.

 

[deugirtni]

Has anyone ever noticed how.. in life.. just the nature of humans, I suppose.. that the more they get, the more they want and expect?

It's like.. just in so many ways.. a business owner who offers x x and x to its customers because they want to make it so great for the customers, that they can choose all these options.. but then the customer wants Xand X on top of that.. and then the business owner is run thru the mud because they couldn't accommodate those additional two requests. But meanwhile, the place down the road doesn't offer ANY options, and they get no complaints. In just 'giving' more options, it meant that even MORE options were automatically expected of the first business owner. Or the executive upon receiving a raise, and their underling says, wow, you're on easy street, I only make half that much.. and the executive says, 'the more one makes, the more one spends'. That type of deal.

Here we had the orphans, with a friendly uncle cousin-money-bank, giving them whatever would make their lives easier for them.. setting them up in each their own businesses chosen by themselves which they felt they would love, so that their life's work wouldn't be like 'work', but a pleasure.. more money than most people will ever see.. but.. there's gotta be a way to get MORE.. there must be a reason why someone's so generous to us, we must therefore be entitled to MORE than that.

Barry had no intention of ever receiving that money back from the orphans. He was a wise man however, and he knew how the tables can turn, once people/humans get 'more'.. they want 'more'. He was merely protecting himself from perhaps this exact eventuality - that by 'giving', he could one day be deemed to be responsible to give even more, or for longer, or forever. Not for the nefarious reasons thought by the orphans, but just because there was a history of 'giving' and support. And of course he's going to cut them off when they're trying to sue him for 1/5th of the company HE built. But that would cause such hardship for the orphans, and Barry was only doing that to get even. The expectations were and still are, unbelievably through the roof. I'll bet Barry came to detest the day when he ever gave these cousins a red penny. imo.

 

[MistyWaters]

Funny how people can go around accusing the respected ADOPTIVE family of being abusive. I'm sure they appreciate that. With NO proof, only the say-so of a disgruntled human, on many fronts.
Funny how Barry bought the business for 1/3 more than it was worth, and yet he is accused of stealing from the orphans. I should say... continues to be accused of stealing from the orphans, even though it has been proven otherwise in courts, and on appeal.
I guess that could be how perception comes to be, that some are ungrateful leaches. Nothing funny about that though.
I should also remind that this 'foster family' who actually adopted all four of the children so they could remain all together, and whom wouldn't have received a red cent for doing so.. or for their ongoing care.. was the choice of the orphans' own mother, because she too was afraid that someone would take from her family what was not rightfully theirs. Even though she had a close blood relative who WANTED to take on the responsibility of raising her four children after her death.
This is just the saddest story ever, all around, from every angle. But not for exactly the reasons that are being portrayed. imo.

This indicates the Trust consisted of other funds that were disbursed to the “orphans” over time, beyond the proceeds from the sale of the drug company.

“Winter recalled: 'We lived in a mansion overlooking the Humber River. We were enrolled in a posh private school. He drove a Rolls Royce. He had two yachts. He was a self-made millionaire.'...”
Canadian tycoon Barry Sherman 'killed wife then himself' | Daily Mail Online

Other assets and real estate are mentioned here as well:
Louis Lloyd Winter - Wikipedia

 

[William_60]

Has anyone ever noticed how.. in life.. just the nature of humans, I suppose.. that the more they get, the more they want and expect?

It's like.. just in so many ways.. a business owner who offers x x and x to its customers because they want to make it so great for the customers, that they can choose all these options.. but then the customer wants Xand X on top of that.. and then the business owner is run thru the mud because they couldn't accommodate those additional two requests. But meanwhile, the place down the road doesn't offer ANY options, and they get no complaints. In just 'giving' more options, it meant that even MORE options were automatically expected of the first business owner. Or the executive upon receiving a raise, and their underling says, wow, you're on easy street, I only make half that much.. and the executive says, 'the more one makes, the more one spends'. That type of deal.

Here we had the orphans, with a friendly uncle cousin-money-bank, giving them whatever would make their lives easier for them.. setting them up in each their own businesses chosen by themselves which they felt they would love, so that their life's work wouldn't be like 'work', but a pleasure.. more money than most people will ever see.. but.. there's gotta be a way to get MORE.. there must be a reason why someone's so generous to us, we must therefore be entitled to MORE than that.

Barry had no intention of ever receiving that money back from the orphans. He was a wise man however, and he knew how the tables can turn, once people/humans get 'more'.. they want 'more'. He was merely protecting himself from perhaps this exact eventuality - that by 'giving', he could one day be deemed to be responsible to give even more, or for longer, or forever. Not for the nefarious reasons thought by the orphans, but just because there was a history of 'giving' and support. And of course he's going to cut them off when they're trying to sue him for 1/5th of the company HE built. But that would cause such hardship for the orphans, and Barry was only doing that to get even. The expectations were and still are, unbelievably through the roof. I'll bet Barry came to detest the day when he ever gave these cousins a red penny. imo.

Good post.

I'll add that there is nothing, not a single external thing that can put to rest the pain of losing both parents when you're so young.

A bitter divorce might rival it, but at least each parent is still around.

Various means of support, moral or otherwise can help, but a positive path forward has to be processed internally.

Pain ruled, and invited resentment.

---

Barry didn't just assist the boys. He assisted Frank D'Angelo and others, including Apotex staffers who were in financial difficulty.

I am now reasonably certain Sherman could not accurately be called a selfish man.

There were donations made that promised rewards or benefits for himself, his family or his business, and there was assistance given without a promise or guarantee of a return.

For someone with stated disbelief in altruism, Barry Sherman, without maybe realizing it, might have indulged in it.

 

[deugirtni]

And call me weird, and call my family bizarre and UNclose-knit.. call me what you like.. but.. I haven't seen my cousins for YEARS. I don't owe my cousins a plugged nickel (whatever that means!). I don't feel ownership or maternity toward my cousins. I wouldn't have felt at age 27 that I should take over the raising of my cousins if their parents had died. In fact, if my uncle had at one time, as has been said, been my father figure and taken me under his wing, and whose wealth was supposed to be bequeathed to me in the event of the uncle/aunt's deaths.. and then they went on to have 4 kids of their own.. I might be suffering my own personal losses. Not in a financial aspect, but.. seems that if that were even true (I believe B's father died when B was something like 9, but yet Uncle Louis didn't 'take him under his wing and show him the ropes at the Empire company' until B was at the tail end of his highschool years, so.. I'm doubting the father figure thing there, personally), Barry's 'father-figure' went on to have his own offspring, and maybe Barry was swept aside and left out in the cold, other than babysitting the company from time to time so the family could go on vacations.. and he was taking over some of the menial jobs in the company, like delivery-driver, etc. Barry was as much a benefit to Louis as Louis was to Barry. It was a weekend job.. a summer job.. he was lucky to have it, and Louis was lucky to have HIM. The real wealth came much much later, as a result of B's own efforts.

I wonder if any of the cousins would have successfully completed a minimum 2 year stint under the supervision/direction of their duly authorized regular supervisor (not their relative), to start at the bottom and do the tasks which they were duly educated and qualified to do? IF Barry had even still owned the company, which he didn't. My own personal guess is that expectations would have again been through the roof, and it may have been impossible for one or more to take direction and start at the bottom. That old 'entitlement' thing again. imo.

 

[William_60]

Plugged Nickel:

'Not worth a plugged nickel' - the meaning and origin of this phrase

 

[William_60]

And call me weird, and call my family bizarre and UNclose-knit.. call me what you like.. but.. I haven't seen my cousins for YEARS. I don't owe my cousins a plugged nickel (whatever that means!). I don't feel ownership or maternity toward my cousins. I wouldn't have felt at age 27 that I should take over the raising of my cousins if their parents had died. In fact, if my uncle had at one time, as has been said, been my father figure and taken me under his wing, and whose wealth was supposed to be bequeathed to me in the event of the uncle/aunt's deaths.. and then they went on to have 4 kids of their own.. I might be suffering my own personal losses. Not in a financial aspect, but.. seems that if that were even true (I believe B's father died when B was something like 9, but yet Uncle Louis didn't 'take him under his wing and show him the ropes at the Empire company' until B was at the tail end of his highschool years, so.. I'm doubting the father figure thing there, personally), Barry's 'father-figure' went on to have his own offspring, and maybe Barry was swept aside and left out in the cold, other than babysitting the company from time to time so the family could go on vacations.. and he was taking over some of the menial jobs in the company, like delivery-driver, etc. Barry was as much a benefit to Louis as Louis was to Barry. It was a weekend job.. a summer job.. he was lucky to have it, and Louis was lucky to have HIM. The real wealth came much much later, as a result of B's own efforts.

I wonder if any of the cousins would have successfully completed a minimum 2 year stint under the supervision/direction of their duly authorized regular supervisor (not their relative), to start at the bottom and do the tasks which they were duly educated and qualified to do? IF Barry had even still owned the company, which he didn't. My own personal guess is that expectations would have again been through the roof, and it may have been impossible for one or more to take direction and start at the bottom. That old 'entitlement' thing again. imo.

One could say very few kids aspire to be...Pharmers.

 

[deugirtni]

Good post.

I'll add that there is nothing, not a single external thing that can put to rest the pain of losing both parents when you're so young.

A bitter divorce might rival it, but at least each parent is still around.

Various means of support, moral or otherwise can help, but a positive path forward has to be processed internally.

Pain ruled, and invited resentment.

---

Barry didn't just assist the boys. He assisted Frank D'Angelo and others, including Apotex staffers who were in financial difficulty.

I am now reasonably certain Sherman could not be accurately be called a selfish man.

There were donations made that promised rewards or benefits for himself, his family or his business, and there was assistance given without a promise or guarantee of a return.

For someone with stated disbelief in altruism, Barry Sherman, without maybe realizing it, might have indulged in it.

There is no doubt that the deaths of both parents was a devastating tragedy for 4 young boys impacting them for life. I can't even imagine, and I would never want to know that kind of devastation. I am not discounting that at ALL in any of this. And i'm sure it has had a big hand in some of the outcomes in this whole story. Somewhere someone has to point out however, that things may have had to have been not so harsh, and the reasons those things didn't happen to lessen the blow.. like perhaps by being raised by already-well-known family members who actually already loved them, as opposed to complete strangers who happened to be Jewish, things may have possibly been just a twig easier on those boys. Or if RT had wanted to keep that business for the boys, they shouldn't have sold it, and instead HIRED someone, like perhaps someone like B, instead of SELLING it. Issue solved. Instead, they SOLD and received their due proceeds. It may not have been the decision that would have been made BY the orphans, had they been of age, but that is who was in charge of the decision making, as per their parents' wishes.

We don't like to blame the dead for poor decisions, but we can't go around blaming just anyone and everyone else either, just because someone is wealthy and made a purchase from the estate, or just because a couple wanted a family of their own and opened their hearts to adopting a ready-made family of 4 preschoolers.

 

[William_60]

There is no doubt that the deaths of both parents was a devastating tragedy for 4 young boys impacting them for life. I can't even imagine, and I would never want to know that kind of devastation. I am not discounting that at ALL in any of this. And i'm sure it has had a big hand in some of the outcomes in this whole story. Somewhere someone has to point out however, that things may have had to have been not so harsh, and the reasons those things didn't happen to lessen the blow.. like perhaps by being raised by already-well-known family members who actually already loved them, as opposed to complete strangers who happened to be Jewish, things may have possibly been just a twig easier on those boys. Or if RT had wanted to keep that business for the boys, they shouldn't have sold it, and instead HIRED someone, like perhaps someone like B, instead of SELLING it. Issue solved. Instead, they SOLD and received their due proceeds. It may not have been the decision that would have been made BY the orphans, had they been of age, but that is who was in charge of the decision making, as per their parents' wishes.

We don't like to blame the dead for poor decisions, but we can't go around blaming just anyone and everyone else either, just because someone is wealthy and made a purchase from the estate, or just because a couple wanted a family of their own and opened their hearts to adopting a ready-made family of 4 preschoolers.

Oh, hey man, I know you have stepped back
and taken a broad view, as others have, and I absolutely do not want to suggest otherwise.

I was just trying to piggyback your post.

 

[deugirtni]

Oh, hey man, I know you have stepped back
and taken a broad view, as others have, and I absolutely do not want to suggest otherwise.

I was just trying to piggyback your post.

I know..
Sometimes my writing comes across as demanding and condescending/accusing or whatever, but it is not the intent.. I need to write better