Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #3

[human]

Hi, just curious about the phrase, 'the patent thing is often paid for by the govt in the US'. Do you mean that it doesn't cost money to get a US Patent? That the fees are covered by the US govt? Thank you

Here is one example. There are many many many. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/YourMoney/story?id=129651

 

[human]

Respectfully snipped for clarity.

I tend to agree with this. Although the cousins sound quite hardened by life, I think they were deeply wronged to begin with, and just want things to be corrected. It's a pretty sad situation in all honesty. I think what these cousins needed from an early age was a sense of family, support and opportunity (in business or otherwise). I don't think BS's handouts over the years really facilitated any of that.

It's a little disheartening that the courts sided with BS on this one... however unsurprising.

So if the company Barry bought went down the tubes, the cousins should have supported Barry with food and housing?

Barry paid for it . Let us say you buy a junker of a car and with your skills transform it into a gem. Does the previous owner get to have part of the fruits of your skill? Should the previous owner get the profits when you sell the car?

The Shemans paid millions to the cousins. Homes, cottages, but it was not enough. They blew their money on drugs.

 

[Grey-St]

So if the company Barry bought went down the tubes, the cousins should have supported Barry with food and housing?

Barry paid for it . Let us say you buy a junker of a car and with your skills transform it into a gem. Does the previous owner get to have part of the fruits of your skill? Should the previous owner get the profits when you sell the car?

The Shemans paid millions to the cousins. Homes, cottages, but it was not enough. They blew their money on drugs.

I get what you're saying, and respect your analogy. But I just think that if early on there was an agreement for the cousins to have a stake in the company, and jobs in their future, which has been reported, it would have done them a lot more good. BS found a way to void that agreement, and cut them out of the new company. The handouts, while generous, did them little good for their overall wellbeing and future autonomy. Is that BS's responsibility? I suppose not. But I think family should look out for one another in a more sustainable way, especially four kids who's lives were essential torn apart, and clearly needed structure and guidance in order to attain their own personal autonomy. Many circumstances contribute to folks turning to drugs. I don't believe the situation was handled in the best possible way from the beginning, and BS became ruthless about it in the end. Just a sad situation IMO.

 

[dotr]

Did they really think BS plotted to kill W, why?
Re post.Rbbm.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...ionize-canadas-drug-industry/article37355332/

Just as Apotex was taking off in the late 1980s, Mr. Sherman unexpectedly reunited with the four Winter boys. They had not fared as well. A couple had turned to drugs and one later died of an overdose. None of them had gotten much from their father's estate. They were entitled to about $330,000 each from the sale of Empire but their adoptive parents spent most of the money and the boys blew through the rest when they turned of age.


After meeting them by chance through a mutual friend in 1988, Mr. Sherman became a benevolent cousin. He bought them houses, gave out cash and provided loans for an assortment of business ventures.
At one point, the boys began asking questions about Empire and they eventually came across the purchase agreement that they alleged contained provisions Mr. Sherman had ignored, including providing them with financial security. They also alleged that Mr. Sherman used the assets of Empire to create Apotex and had not properly compensated them. In 2006, they sued, demanding an ownership stake in the generic drug giant. "Losing our parents at such a young age is tragic, but what happened after their deaths is unbelievable," Kerry Winter, one of the orphaned boys, said in launching the lawsuit. "Barry's father died when he was young, and my dad took him under his wing and taught him the family business. It's disappointing that we're fighting this way now."

The legal fight turned ugly, with allegations flying that Mr. Sherman had plotted to kill Mr. Winter and that he used handouts to control the cousins. Mr. Sherman hit back by calling in their loans and moving to seize their houses. The suit finally ended last September when Ontario Superior Court Justice Kenneth Hood threw out the case, ruling that "the claimed interest in Apotex was wishful thinking, and beyond fanciful."

 

[human]

I get what you're saying, and respect your analogy. But I just think that if early on there was an agreement for the cousins to have a stake in the company, and jobs in their future, which has been reported, it would have done them a lot more good. BS found a way to void that agreement, and cut them out of the new company. The handouts, while generous, did them little good for their overall wellbeing and future autonomy. Is that BS's responsibility? I suppose not. But I think family should look out for one another in a more sustainable way, especially four kids who's lives were essential torn apart, and clearly needed structure and guidance in order to attain their own personal autonomy. Many circumstances contribute to folks turning to drugs. I don't believe the situation was handled in the best possible way from the beginning, and BS became ruthless about it in the end. Just a sad situation IMO.

He did not know their situation until told. Then he paid for at least one to go to rehab.

The mother chose to alienate the children from the family. Back in those days did people kmow about enabling and how to attempt to treat addiction?

He gave them homes and money. What else was he supposed to do? You cannot make an addict quit. Do you give addicts part of the company you built? Why would any person do that?

 

[PaulR]

Reading that G&M article - Mr. Winter had absolutely nothing to do with Apotex. Sherman had bought Winter's company, Empire, sold it, then used the proceeds to start Apotex a few years later. I don't see why the cousins think they have some ownership stake in a company that was founded nine years after their father died. Their parents squandering the money that should have gone to them is a serious issue and not the responsibility of Barry Sherman.

 

[Grey-St]

He did not know their situation until told. Then he paid for at least one to go to rehab.

The mother chose to alienate the children from the family. Back in those days did people kmow about enabling and how to attempt to treat addiction?

He gave them homes and money. What else was he supposed to do? You cannot make an addict quit. Do you give addicts part of the company you built? Why would any person do that?

I'm not really talking about when they became adults and struggled with addiction. I think earlier on in their younger years, he should have honoured the original agreement that cousins have a stake in the company and job opportunity. I think that would have served them much better coming into adulthood. A sense of purpose and personal accountability. Work ethic. Self esteem. The ability to reach their full potential. Learning the family business that was once taught to BS from their father. I think these are the things that could have kept them on a better, more constructive path.

 

[Grey-St]

Reading that G&M article - Mr. Winter had absolutely nothing to do with Apotex. Sherman had bought Winter's company, Empire, sold it, then used the proceeds to start Apotex a few years later. I don't see why the cousins think they have some ownership stake in a company that was founded nine years after their father died. Their parents squandering the money that should have gone to them is a serious issue and not the responsibility of Barry Sherman.

I think it's because with Empire, there was an agreement that the cousins have a stake in the company and job opportunities when they became of age. When BS sold Empire, that agreement was void. Some may feel that the human thing to do, would be to still honour that agreement over to Apotex, which was created on the profit made from the first company. Legally speaking, I suppose BS wasn't obligated to do that.

The cousins adoptive parents squandering their inheritance from the death of their parents, was also a sad and serious issue, yes.

 

[kemo]

A family I was close to had a very similar situation, abet at a much lower level. The family matriarch died leaving the family home to her three children. The two daughters were single moms with non supporting ex’es while the son had a good job and no dependents. The women needed cash right away while the son thought the state was in a recession and it was not a good time to try to sell the house. The house was appraised for $180K so the son bought his sisters out for $60K each. It seemed fair and as far as I knew, everyone was happy with the deal.

A few years later, the sisters had burned through all of their money while the housing market went through the roof. The son sold the house for almost $500K. The sisters really expected their brother to give them their “share” of the proceeds. The sisters had signed over their interest in the house; they don’t deny that, but they claim that was only so that their bother could get a mortgage so he could pay them off. They claimed there was an “understanding” that the house would still be part “theirs”.

The sisters felt that their brother had a moral obligation to share his good fortunes. Legally, they had nothing to stand on. No lawyer would take their case. This has torn the family apart and led to lawsuits over other issues, threats and vandalism. They have not spoken in years.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[pamelado2]

I'm sorry, but they each received $330,000?!?

Could Sherman predict the future? Wouldn't it be better to set the kids up with money that would guarantee them the ability to get a good education and make something of themselves? Cuz that's what he did. What if he hadn't bought the company? Could they have run it? Would it have succeeded? There certainly wasn't a guarantee Sherman would succeed.

Also, we're only hearing a small percentage of what happened. Who knows the efforts that were made, if any to help the kids?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[MistyWaters]

"After meeting them by chance through a mutual friend in 1988, Mr. Sherman became a benevolent cousin. He bought them houses, gave out cash and provided loans for an assortment of business ventures."
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...ionize-canadas-drug-industry/article37355332/

The story goes the cousins felt they were receiving handouts and filed the lawsuit in 2006. After the lawsuit was filed Sherman withdrew all support. IMO it seems to me the cousins actions were motivated purely by greed and I agree with the judges decision along with his comment about "wishful thinking".

 

[JDG]

Is there proof or a link that states, other from Kerry Winter, that the adoptive parents squandered their inheritance?

They were adopted into a very prestigious and wealthy Jewish family, Dr. Martin Barkin and his wife Carol.
One can google Dr. Martin Barkin and get an idea of his prestige and wealth. Now, that does/does not make an judgement about whether or not they touched monies belonging to the Winters but I would find it hard to believe.

I do know that when there are minors and inheritances, in Ontario, there are laws to protect such monies for the very reasons posed here.

The Winter 'orphans' have also failed in a suit against the company that took care of their fathers estate and an appeal. THATs when they turned to suing Barry Sherman. After losing twice in court.

Toronto Life, article Bitter Pill

Toronto Star
Globe and Mail

 

[MistyWaters]

I'm sorry, but they each received $330,000?!?

Could Sherman predict the future? Wouldn't it be better to set the kids up with money that would guarantee them the ability to get a good education and make something of themselves? Cuz that's what he did. What if he hadn't bought the company? Could they have run it? Would it have succeeded? There certainly wasn't a guarantee Sherman would succeed.

Also, we're only hearing a small percentage of what happened. Who knows the efforts that were made, if any to help the kids?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Yes when Sherman and a partner bought the uncle's company, it appears the sale proceeds were willed to the cousins. Likely held in trust by the adoptive parents until they came of age.

"Just as Apotex was taking off in the late 1980s, Mr. Sherman unexpectedly reunited with the four Winter boys. They had not fared as well. A couple had turned to drugs and one later died of an overdose. None of them had gotten much from their father's estate. They were entitled to about $330,000 each from the sale of Empire but their adoptive parents spent most of the money and the boys blew through the rest when they turned of age..."
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...ionize-canadas-drug-industry/article37355332/

 

[dalsglen]

so very sad to me... such a sad, small minded, self/man-centred world view..I wish someone could have made him see the alternate reality...

(This is obviously only my opinion and was a heart reaction to the worldview Mr Sherman subscribed to at the time of this writing ...it is not meant to insult or belittle Mr Sherman who DID do some good in his lifetime...nor any fellow websleuthers who hold a similiar belief system...I apologize if I offended... )

Does 'no meaning or purpose to life' attitude make murder/suicide more palatable and feasible given the right circumstances? More a philosophical question than anything...

Ashley, with utmost respect to yourself your first paragraph made me properly laugh with the contradiction, so thank you for that.

I think much the same as he did, in so much as you live, you die, end of, it IS pointless really imo. I dont give religion a thought at all really, its meaningless to me, but I do have respect for those that do believe and admire the comfort that it brings them.

 

[MistyWaters]

He did not know their situation until told. Then he paid for at least one to go to rehab.

The mother chose to alienate the children from the family. Back in those days did people kmow about enabling and how to attempt to treat addiction?

He gave them homes and money. What else was he supposed to do? You cannot make an addict quit. Do you give addicts part of the company you built? Why would any person do that?

For certain one wouldn't employ an addict in a pharmaceutical company.

 

[zencompass]

I think it's because with Empire, there was an agreement that the cousins have a stake in the company and job opportunities when they became of age. When BS sold Empire, that agreement was void. Some may feel that the human thing to do, would be to still honour that agreement over to Apotex, which was created on the profit made from the first company. Legally speaking, I suppose BS wasn't obligated to do that.

The cousins adoptive parents squandering their inheritance from the death of their parents, was also a sad and serious issue, yes.

Sherman had opportunities to ensure that the cousins' interests were protected in the sale of Empire and also further down the road with Apotex. However, it wouldn't have resulted in "mutual advantage" because, although the cousins would have gained - Sherman would not have. In his writings, Sherman states "if and when it is to mutual advantage".

From Barry Sherman's Chapter Two The Pursuit of Happiness:

“I cannot see that human behaviour differs in any fundamental way from that of numerous species on the savannahs of Serengeti. We are all driven by our instincts to eat, drink, copulate, protect ourselves and our young, and cooperate with others, particularly those most closely related to us, if and when it is to our mutual advantage,” he wrote.

Sherman tells us that he believes we cooperate with others "if and when it is to our mutual advantage". This, to me, sums up why he did not protect the cousins' interests when Empire was being sold. It would have been to the cousins' advantage but not to Sherman's advantage.



When Sherman writes:

“Individuals who help others to an unusual extent are considered to be ‘kind,’ ‘moral’ or generous,’ although, if my thesis that everything is done in pursuit of happiness is correct, then there can be no such thing as (altruism), kindness, generosity or morality.”

The above statement is flawed. I am happy because I feel joy when I am kind, moral and generous despite Sherman's assertions that these concepts do not exist.

I see kindness, morality and generosity throughout these threads by all of you. You demonstrate these concepts with your words.

If these concepts did not exist then perhaps none of us would be on these threads.

We would only be "driven by instincts" to make us successful and we would only do things that were to "mutual advantage".

Without judging Barry Sherman, I realize he is telling us who he is and what drives him, through his writing.

Personally, I find his "Legacy" full of false concepts and heavily flawed, however he is stating what he believes to be true. His statements, his life. He is entitled to his opinions, but they are only his opinions.

I haven't experienced society driven only with "a mutual advantage" and devoid of kindness, morality and generosity such as Sherman describes as human instincts in my life and one thing I'm certain of - is that I never want to.

I realize, as we do on this Website, that there are people who have suffered and are suffering in their lives by humans who are treating them like Sherman describes. It is these people who are victims on these very threads because of the way they have been treated in life and are being treated. We are here because we are compassionate and have the gifts of humanity which Sherman not only shuns in his writings, but declares them non-existent.

Just my opinion.

 

[human]

He is saying that people do things that result in positive things for themselves. For instance, being happy. It does not have to be monetary.

He was getting no mutual benefit from the cousins.

He sold the company. They got money. And plenty of it. That is a large sum adjusting for the years it was paid.

Giving them jobs? They were already addicts. Were they trained as chemists? What exactly would their jobs have been?

 

[Grey-St]

Yes when Sherman and a partner bought the uncle's company, it appears the sale proceeds were willed to the cousins. Likely held in trust by the adoptive parents until they came of age.

"Just as Apotex was taking off in the late 1980s, Mr. Sherman unexpectedly reunited with the four Winter boys. They had not fared as well. A couple had turned to drugs and one later died of an overdose. None of them had gotten much from their father's estate. They were entitled to about $330,000 each from the sale of Empire but their adoptive parents spent most of the money and the boys blew through the rest when they turned of age..."
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...ionize-canadas-drug-industry/article37355332/

I suppose it is tricky to know the complete and accurate facts when it comes to the situation with the cousins. But this article does state that the adoptive parents spent most of their inheritance, and BS wasn't in contact with them until reconnecting in the late 80's when one had already died, and the rest hadn't fared well. I think that's a pretty sad outcome.

I just wonder how things could have been different, if their adoptive parents were more attentive and loving (I read another article stating that they were quite awful and emotionally unavailable, I will try to find it), and that BS was more in their life as they grew up. I think he could have been a great support to them, and not in a monetary way. We aren't just born knowing how to become self-sufficient, well-adjusted, successful people. We have to be parented in a way where we develop those skills. Hindsight is always 20/20 though.

Support, guidance, nurturance, etc, beats out money every single time when it comes to human development. Child development, adolescent development, even into adulthood we are still malleable and capable of change when given the proper attention and care.

I'm also in no way stating that the cousins are angels. I actually think they sound quite intimidating in more recent times, at least Kerry does. I even thought when this case first started that they could have murdered the Sherman's. I just think their upbringing sounded sad and unfortunate.

 

[Grey-St]

He is saying that people do things that result in positive things for themselves. For instance, being happy. It does not have to be monetary.

He was getting no mutual benefit from the cousins.

He sold the company. They got money. And plenty of it. That is a large sum adjusting for the years it was paid.

Giving them jobs? They were already addicts. Were they trained as chemists? What exactly would their jobs have been?

Respectfully bbm. And I think that's quite sad.

Maintaining a relationship with his cousins as they grew up, showed no benefit to BS.

Had the cousins had the prospects of a job at Apotex, and the support of and a relationship with BS, maybe they wouldn't have turned to drugs? I'm not talking about giving them jobs when they were addicts. I'm talking about how did they get there, and what could have been different?

Additionally, I'm sure there are many other administrative, or otherwise, positions at Apotex that don't require being a chemist.

 

[dotr]

Rbbm.
Sad and strange as it began so it ended, "extraordinary and bizarre situation" imo, speculation.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rep...family-feud-comes-to-the-fore/article1069800/

Court filings and interviews with relatives reveal a bitterly divided family that has been beset by a series of troubles. One cousin, Dana, died of a heroin overdose in 1995 shortly after being charged with conspiracy to commit murder. Royal Trust alleges in court filings that one reason the cousins could never become involved in Apotex was because of "significant personal issues, which included criminal activity, incarceration, serious drug addictions and mental health issues."

The cousins and Mr. Sherman lost touch for more than 10 years after he started Apotex. It wasn't until 1988 that contact was re-established. Dana was facing trouble and turned to Mr. Sherman for financial help. Mr. Sherman gave him money, bailed him out of jail and helped him land various jobs. But Dana's drug problem worsened and he died seven years later.

He bought his cousins homes, cottages, financed various business ventures and gave them millions of dollars, according to court filings. Kerry received up to $15,000 a month for years, according to court filings. After Dana died, Mr. Sherman bought his widow a home and sent monthly cheques to her two children.

The cousins allege the money made them dependent on Mr. Sherman and he used it to keep them under control, often requiring security for financial gifts.

In 2001, they went to court and won an order requiring Royal Trust to turn over documents relating to the deal. The cousins allege Mr. Sherman demanded that they drop the legal action or he would cut off financial support. When they filed a suit against Royal Trust last year, Mr. Sherman allegedly told Kerry to sell his cottage and slashed his monthly stipend to $2,000. He also allegedly cut off monthly support to Jeffery and Dana's widow.

Not all the cousins agree. Jeffrey has backed out of the lawsuit and, according to Mr. Sherman, he is furious at the others. They claim he is fearful of Mr. Sherman.

Mr. Sherman, 64, can't understand how it has all come to this. "To suggest that I was trying to keep control and cover up information is ridiculous," he said exasperated. "When I found out these kids had problems I did everything I could to help them. So you've got an extraordinary and bizarre situation here."