Canada - Barry, 75, & Honey Sherman, 70, found dead, Toronto, 15 Dec 2017 #7

[Satchie]

My memory is that Steve Paikin subsequently deleted his tweet, and apologized for it. I don't think his information was correct.

He was also called out for his very unfortunate metaphor about a noose, it was a spectacular twitter fail.

 

[Grey-St]

I don't necessarily know if the information was incorrect, re: Steve Paikin. I think he may have just got in a bit of hot water for it, thus the retraction.

 

[WINDSOR]

The question is; could a police investigation into the Sherman's activities, be a reason for their murders?

For that to happen, the perpetrator(s) would have to be concerned that the Sherman's would 'roll-over' on them, while the Sherman's were being investigated or charged with an offense.

I do not believe Barry was the sort to accept a plea deal, he would rather fight the charges for years.

Now anything is possible, and let us say you were a partner with Barry in some scheme, that might be illegal. You hear that the cops are after Barry regarding this scheme. You do not want to get caught, and the only person that knows of your involvement is Barry. {This is a big assumption, that Barry kept no records, and told no one about you}. You might feel that Barry being dead is your best insurance against prosecution.

Murdering someone, to avoid, a likely lesser offense does not make sense to me. Secondly the 'staging' would only make sense after the Sherman's 'ratted' someone out not before.

 

[ldlager]

I don't necessarily know if the information was incorrect, re: Steve Paikin. I think he may have just got in a bit of hot water for it, thus the retraction.

Agreed. tremendous insensitivity shown!

 

[ldlager]

The question is; could a police investigation into the Sherman's activities, be a reason for their murders?

For that to happen, the perpetrator(s) would have to be concerned that the Sherman's would 'roll-over' on them, while the Sherman's were being investigated or charged with an offense.

I do not believe Barry was the sort to accept a plea deal, he would rather fight the charges for years.

Now anything is possible, and let us say you were a partner with Barry in some scheme, that might be illegal. You hear that the cops are after Barry regarding this scheme. You do not want to get caught, and the only person that knows of your involvement is Barry. {This is a big assumption, that Barry kept no records, and told no one about you}. You might feel that Barry being dead is your best insurance against prosecution.

Murdering someone, to avoid, a likely lesser offense does not make sense to me. Secondly the 'staging' would only make sense after the Sherman's 'ratted' someone out not before.

With respect Windsor, in your scenario, one cannot automatically assume that it was a "lesser offence" that occurred, but I have no specific knowledge.

 

[Satchie]

I wonder if the rumour Paikin picked up was actually about the parliamentary lobbying commissioner's investigation into Barry Sherman.

Political partisans always try to create scandals to take down their enemies. They'd been working hard trying to create a scandal over Sherman hosting parties for Trudeau back in 15/16, it must have been disappointing to them, to lose the opportunity to get some bad press for Trudeau. I can imagine someone getting Paikin's ear and exaggerating the inquiry into a crime, just for the sake of whatever mud might stick to Trudeau.

ETA: the story about the lobbying investigation was published a few days after Paikin's tweet.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...nvestigation-for-breaking-lobbying-rules.html

 

[WINDSOR]

With respect Windsor, in your scenario, one cannot automatically assume that it was a "lesser offence" that occurred, but I have no specific knowledge.

From my perspective murder is the most serious crime there is.

Unless you believe one of the Shermans were involved with someone else in the murder of a third party, I think it is safe to assume that any other crimes they were being investigated for, were of lesser magnitude and likely of the white collar variety.

It is not uncommon for people to be slain because they know too much, and could incriminate others. I also agree with the message being sent through the staging of the bodies might be for others to keep quiet. But then it would have to be a quite a large group of individuals who are involved in the initial criminal conspiracy. The Shermans, the perpetrator(s), and those who are part of the conspiracy that the perpetrator wants to remain silent.

When it all comes around, I believe the key is to discover what was the message being sent and to whom, by the staging of the bodies.

Does anybody have any ideas regarding the purpose, or message, or intended recipients of the staging?

 

[ldlager]

From my perspective murder is the most serious crime there is.

Unless you believe one of the Shermans were involved with someone else in the murder of a third party, I think it is safe to assume that any other crimes they were being investigated for, were of lesser magnitude and likely of the white collar variety.

It is not uncommon for people to be slain because they know too much, and could incriminate others. I also agree with the message being sent through the staging of the bodies might be for others to keep quiet. But then it would have to be a quite a large group of individuals who are involved in the initial criminal conspiracy. The Shermans, the perpetrator(s), and those who are part of the conspiracy that the perpetrator wants to remain silent.

When it all comes around, I believe the key is to discover what was the message being sent and to whom, by the staging of the bodies.

Does anybody have any ideas regarding the purpose, or message, or intended recipients of the staging?

I agree that murder is the most serious crime. There are stories around related to clinical trials conducted on humans, and about the provision by Apotex of bulk drug supplies to Haiti. In addition, we have the Olivieri case involving Apotex from a number of years ago. Again, I have no specific knowledge of whether a drug manufactured by or provided by Apotex resulted in adverse health reactions, or even death to one or more individuals. However, it is certainly possible, and someone close to the victim(s) could seek revenge. The point of my original post was simply to point out that Paikin tweeted (using info from a source he considered reliable) that LE was about to take action against the Shermans. What those supposed crimes were, and how someone involved would react to that situation isn't known to me, and the information may not even be accurate. Certainly many people have been murdered as a result of being a part of, or having knowledge of, a result of a white collar crime(s)- for many reasons.
As far as the staging, I have previously posted about the similarity of the method of display of the Sherman's bodies and the display of bodies following public executions conducted in Iran. Other than that, I can't help but wonder if it was just a coincidence that the bodies were left in the pool area, which had been the subject of so many legal disputes with contractors. all JMO

 

[Grey-St]

The question is; could a police investigation into the Sherman's activities, be a reason for their murders?

For that to happen, the perpetrator(s) would have to be concerned that the Sherman's would 'roll-over' on them, while the Sherman's were being investigated or charged with an offense.

I do not believe Barry was the sort to accept a plea deal, he would rather fight the charges for years.

Now anything is possible, and let us say you were a partner with Barry in some scheme, that might be illegal. You hear that the cops are after Barry regarding this scheme. You do not want to get caught, and the only person that knows of your involvement is Barry. {This is a big assumption, that Barry kept no records, and told no one about you}. You might feel that Barry being dead is your best insurance against prosecution.

Murdering someone, to avoid, a likely lesser offense does not make sense to me. Secondly the 'staging' would only make sense after the Sherman's 'ratted' someone out not before.

This is a good, logical analysis, but I don't know how logical or rational people in these circles can be? People who would do something like this? Additional, your last point could be the case. Maybe BS did rat, and this was their payback?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/business/worldbusiness/15drug.html

The whole story will be in his autobiography, Mr. Sherman says, or it might emerge sooner, as the facts unfold about Plavix.

“In due course,’’ he said, “you’ll have it all.”

August 2006

 

[JDG]

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/business/worldbusiness/15drug.html



August 2006

He never wrote an autobiography, other than those notes he wrote on a family vacation. They were an interesting read and gave some insight into 'who' he really was but I am not sure why you posted this VERY OLD article from NYT.

The article is 12 yrs old and mainly about Plavix and alludes to him calling Dr. Nancy Olivieri 'nuts' on 60 minutes.

Just an FYI, its a very old article, short on 'news'. IMO

 

[dotr]

He never wrote an autobiography, other than those notes he wrote on a family vacation. They were an interesting read and gave some insight into 'who' he really was but I am not sure why you posted this VERY OLD article from NYT.

The article is 12 yrs old and mainly about Plavix and alludes to him calling Dr. Nancy Olivieri 'nuts' on 60 minutes.

Just an FYI, its a very old article, short on 'news'. IMO

Thinking FromGermany's intention was to highlight this eerie foreshadowing comment..

“In due course,’’ he said, “you’ll have it all.”

to which i would add this one..

It will be the story of a brainy kid born in Toronto who becomes Canada’s richest generic drug mogul.Though a work in progress, it has the makings of a page turner.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/b...ss/15drug.html
imo, speculation.rbbm.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

He never wrote an autobiography, other than those notes he wrote on a family vacation. They were an interesting read and gave some insight into 'who' he really was but I am not sure why you posted this VERY OLD article from NYT.

The article is 12 yrs old and mainly about Plavix and alludes to him calling Dr. Nancy Olivieri 'nuts' on 60 minutes.

Just an FYI, its a very old article, short on 'news'. IMO

A Generic Drug Tale, With an Ending Yet to Be Written - 2006

Alone the headline I found quite interesting, more so the entire content of the article. A further interesting read I had about Apotex' counterparty Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis to see what was following on this:

It is the part where Mr. Sherman seemingly outsmarts two big drug companies, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis, to market the first generic form of the big-selling drug Plavix five years before its patent expires. And it could conceivably end with someone in jail.

“They couldn’t see that maybe certain things were going to end them up in prison,” Mr. Sherman said last Friday during an interview in the Toronto building where his generic Plavix copy is being made.

http://www.matthew-ong.com/the-canc...ng-time-disgraced-exec-reflects-on-bms-heyday
Book review: In memoir written to avoid doing time, disgraced exec reflects on BMS heyday
7/6/2012

In fact, he was compelled to write it. A federal judge ordered the former senior vice president of Bristol-Myers Squibb to produce an unusual 75,000-word manuscript reflecting on his “criminal behavior in this case so that others similarly situated may be guided in avoiding such behavior.”
The sentence handed down by Judge Ricardo Urbina, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, allowed Bodnar to stay out of prison after pleading guilty to lying to the government. Bodnar, a physician and an attorney, provided false certificate to the Federal Trade Commission about a secret deal that included delaying the introduction of a generic version of Plavix, BMS’ blockbuster blood thinner.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maddie...aires-who-died-in-the-last-year/#26b34bd86b2f

From The World's Richest Woman To A Strangled Mogul: The Billionaires Who Died In The Last Year


"People tell me life is short, and I say, 'Yeah, so I better get the work done,' " Sherman said in his first appearance in Forbes, in July 2000, just over 17 years before his violent death.

 

[Wondergirl]

The real question to me is why didn’t she advise them in advance that she wouldn’t be attending the meeting? Even if something comes up at the last minute, most people would I think send a text or email to say they won’t be able to attend the meeting. She evidently didn’t do that. I would really like to know if BS was at home when this meeting was supposed to take place. Also, I would like to know the visiting schedule for her personal trainer during that week.

I completely agree.

Honey not notifying them indicates to me that she was BIG TIME distracted.

Why was Honey so uncharacteristically distracted? A red herring?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I completely agree.

Honey not notifying them indicates to me that she was BIG TIME distracted.

Why was Honey so uncharacteristically distracted? A red herring?

She might have been under surveillance by someone still unknown.

 

[WINDSOR]

I completely agree.

Honey not notifying them indicates to me that she was BIG TIME distracted.

Why was Honey so uncharacteristically distracted? A red herring?

Sometimes a digestive disorder or a sore back can be a big distraction as well.

 

[ldlager]

Sometimes a digestive disorder or a sore back can be a big distraction as well.

vv

For sure that could be. Her response was that she was “dealing with some stuff”, not that she wasn’t well. It would have been easier for her to write that she wasn’t feeling well though. The chair of the board called the situation that day “bizarre”. And she still went to the meeting thurs night, and didn’t cancel her trainer on Friday.

 

[WINDSOR]

Something that is curious to me is the fact that the MacArthur serial killer case in Toronto is getting almost daily coverage in the media while there is little or no media coverage regarding the Sherman case.

Now the media interest may be driven by regular police updates and press conferences about MacArthur, and there has been almost nothing recently from the police regarding the Shermans.

No doubt the MacArthur case being more much sensational drives the media interest. I wonder if the media interest then drives the Police investigation in terms of resources and investigators allocated to each case. Makes one think.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Something that is curious to me is the fact that the MacArthur serial killer case in Toronto is getting almost daily coverage in the media while there is little or no media coverage regarding the Sherman case.

Now the media interest may be driven by regular police updates and press conferences about MacArthur, and there has been almost nothing recently from the police regarding the Shermans.

No doubt the MacArthur case being more much sensational drives the media interest. I wonder if the media interest then drives the Police investigation in terms of resources and investigators allocated to each case. Makes one think.

No politics, no economics, no religion, no VIPs - only sex motives by a landscaper BUT search for many more of his unknown (by number and name) possible victims, IMO. They have to find how many victims are buried on Bruce MA's trail. In case of the S' they don't search for anything it seems.