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

[ABro]

Yes, in the wayne Millard case the family wholeheartedly accepted the idea.

No they didn't. Dellen Millard, the alleged murderer, accepted it. Where have you seen that the rest of the family or those close to Wayne Millard accepted it?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Yes, in the wayne Millard case the family wholeheartedly accepted the idea.

If the suspected murderer (Dellen M) was accepting the exonerating idea of suicide, we may search for the one in the Sherman case who is accepting suicide wholeheartedly. To my mind comes KW. Who else perhaps?

 

[dotr]

Rbbm, this seems to be an integral piece of the " staging ''. imo, speculation.
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/...re-likely-murdered-by-contract-killers-report

According to the Star’s sources, the Shermans weren’t hanged but rather were found sitting down by the side of their pool, legs facing away from the pool, with men’s leather belts pulled tightly around their necks. The other end of the belts were tied to a pool railing, ensuring the Shermans would stay upright. The paper also reported that the Shermans’ were likely tied together by their wrists at some point and that there was no sign of drugs in their bodies that could explain their deaths.

 

[ldlager]

Rbbm, this seems to be an integral piece of the " staging ''. imo, speculation.
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/...re-likely-murdered-by-contract-killers-report

Again, they may have been strangled and killed using the belt while they were already attached to the railing. If not, the autopsies would probably reveal a second set of ligature marks. Well, at least the second autopsy would have. Imo

 

[miele.m]

Police are unbiased? I wholeheartedly disagree. The police can be very biased and possess tunnel vision. They're human. I'm of the opinion that this played into the initial investigation. I don't fault the family for seeing this and feeling as though they needed a parallel and independent investigation to take place. I don't believe it's because they wanted to hear a certain conclusion, I think it's that they wanted to hear the truth, and be confident that the investigation was proceeding fairly and accurately. I would have done no different if I had their resources.

They didn't make the decision to do so out of thin air. TPS may not have made any public statements until mid January, but leaks and opinions were oozing out of their organization, and that's what prompted the family to do what they did.

Ultimately, the lead detective would not have concluded this to be a double homicide if she was not confident in that decision. I'm not swayed by the theory that the government, police force and family are conspiring together to keep the family name in good standing. Gomes is a tough cookie, and takes her job seriously. I don't believe she could be convinced to do anything unethical, or be persuaded by politics or a parallel investigation. If she has concluded this to be a double homicide, then I'm confident that it is.

Someone ‘anonymously’ donated $100 million dollars to the Centre of Mental Health and Addiction in Toronto ——just before Gomez announced it was a ‘targeted double homicide’.
I closely watched Gomez read her announcement,
journalist in the crowd asked her how the Sherman Adult kids were now doing——and during a moment of being unreserved or not covert she naturally smiles and says ‘they are very happy.’
Why would they be ‘happy’ ?
To hear that it was a double murder instead of a suicide-murder? or perhaps because they donated $100 million to this centre in exchange for the TPS to say it was a double murder?
$100 million donation to a very underfunded centre is huge. Why was it anonymous?
Why the same timing?
Who would have to gain something with this anonymous biggest donation in history?
The Sherman name. Preserve their ‘high status’ preserve their ‘pristine image’ etc.
Just my humble cynical opinion.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JDG]

Yes, in the wayne Millard case the family wholeheartedly accepted the idea.

Do you have a link please? I must have missed that, about them accepting it.
When I read WMs obituary, it was so strange that I had doubts and I don't work for LE.

I suspect that was all about life insurance policies and inheritances, maybe the wife believed it or not.
Maybe she, like myself, thought it was fishy but she may have been afraid she would be next.

She certainly got her name on the deeds very quickly when DM was arrested. All assets were moved to her name, immediately. Gee, that seems to be a theme in many of these cases. Like must attract like. IMO

The monster from Trenton, turned everything over to his wife as soon as possible to prevent his victims from making any claims.

 

[Grey-St]

If the suspected murderer (Dellen M) was accepting the exonerating idea of suicide, we may search for the one in the Sherman case who is accepting suicide wholeheartedly. To my mind comes KW. Who else perhaps?

Not a bad point.

 

[Grey-St]

Someone ‘anonymously’ donated $100 million dollars to the Centre of Mental Health and Addiction in Toronto ——just before Gomez announced it was a ‘targeted double homicide’.
I closely watched Gomez read her announcement,
journalist in the crowd asked her how the Sherman Adult kids were now doing——and during a moment of being unreserved or not covert she naturally smiles and says ‘they are very happy.’
Why would they be ‘happy’ ?
To hear that it was a double murder instead of a suicide-murder? or perhaps because they donated $100 million to this centre in exchange for the TPS to say it was a double murder?
$100 million donation to a very underfunded centre is huge. Why was it anonymous?
Why the same timing?
Who would have to gain something with this anonymous biggest donation in history?
The Sherman name. Preserve their ‘high status’ preserve their ‘pristine image’ etc.
Just my humble cynical opinion.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they had something to gain, such as preserving their high status or pristine imagine, I doubt they would have donated that kind of money anonymously.

To add, CAMH is one of the most well funded organizations in our city. There are far more organizations I would consider "under funded". With that being said, mental health initiatives don't get the same kind of support as regular health initiatives, and the work CAMH does is vital. Many people out there make donations while not wanting the recognition; it's really quite genuine, humble, and admirable. I don't think it's fair to sum up this generosity as a conspiracy theory.

I don't think the Sherman's had anything to do with that donation, nor do I think there was any funny business going on here. I think Gomes meant the family was relieved to finally have an outcome. Happy was a poor choice of words.

 

[miele.m]

If they had something to gain, such as preserving their high status or pristine imagine, I doubt they would have donated that kind of money anonymously.

To add, CAMH is one of the most well funded organizations in our city. There are far more organizations I would consider "under funded". With that being said, mental health initiatives don't get the same kind of support as regular health initiatives, and the work CAMH does is vital. Many people out there make donations while not wanting the recognition; it's really quite genuine, humble, and admirable. I don't think it's fair to sum up this generosity as a conspiracy theory.

I don't think the Sherman's had anything to do with that donation, nor do I think there was any funny business going on here. I think Gomes meant the family was relieved to finally have an outcome. Happy was a poor choice of words.

Thanks for your feedback and your opinion.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JayFriend]

If they had something to gain, such as preserving their high status or pristine imagine, I doubt they would have donated that kind of money anonymously.

Can charitable donations be made anonymously and still be written off by the donor?

 

[bluesneakers]

If they had something to gain, such as preserving their high status or pristine imagine, I doubt they would have donated that kind of money anonymously.

To add, CAMH is one of the most well funded organizations in our city. There are far more organizations I would consider "under funded". With that being said, mental health initiatives don't get the same kind of support as regular health initiatives, and the work CAMH does is vital. Many people out there make donations while not wanting the recognition; it's really quite genuine, humble, and admirable. I don't think it's fair to sum up this generosity as a conspiracy theory.

I don't think the Sherman's had anything to do with that donation, nor do I think there was any funny business going on here. I think Gomes meant the family was relieved to finally have an outcome. Happy was a poor choice of words.

I think the donation process was in place long before the Shermans died.

 

[bluesneakers]

Can charitable donations be made anonymously and still be written off by the donor?

Looks like yes:

People make charitable donations for a variety of personal reasons. In some instances, donors prefer to remain anonymous when funding their favourite charity. If an anonymous donor follows the correct procedure, he is still able to receive a credit when filing his income tax.

In the case of an anonymous donation, the charity does not know the name of the donor, and therefore cannot put it on the receipt. To allow anonymous donors to still benefit from the tax credits, the CRA has adopted a policy that outlines the steps that should be followed in order to receive a valid receipt from the charity.

https://turbotax.intuit.ca/tips/claiming-tax-credits-for-anonymous-charitable-donations-5364

 

[JDG]

Can charitable donations be made anonymously and still be written off by the donor?

If its anonymous, there is nothing to be gained. We could all claim to be the anonymous donor and demand a tax receipt.

Why would/should we think its from the Shermans grown children?? Is there a link for that?? I must have missed that part.

Edit: from the post above, seems I may be wrong.

 

[JDG]

I think the donation process was in place long before the Shermans died.

I agree. It was a coincidence that their deaths and then a huge donation to CAMH was accepted in a public ceremony.

Why are we thinking it came from the Sherman family?? IMO it doesn't 'fit' their normal philanthropic choices.

They seemed to lean more towards education, elder care/elder home at Baycrest and as others stated, they helped many people 'quietly' or 'privately'.

 

[JDG]

Someone ‘anonymously’ donated $100 million dollars to the Centre of Mental Health and Addiction in Toronto ——just before Gomez announced it was a ‘targeted double homicide’.
I closely watched Gomez read her announcement,
journalist in the crowd asked her how the Sherman Adult kids were now doing——and during a moment of being unreserved or not covert she naturally smiles and says ‘they are very happy.’
Why would they be ‘happy’ ?
To hear that it was a double murder instead of a suicide-murder? or perhaps because they donated $100 million to this centre in exchange for the TPS to say it was a double murder?
$100 million donation to a very underfunded centre is huge. Why was it anonymous?
Why the same timing?
Who would have to gain something with this anonymous biggest donation in history?
The Sherman name. Preserve their ‘high status’ preserve their ‘pristine image’ etc.
Just my humble cynical opinion.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That seems pretty strange. Wonder if there is a video of her stating that??

Why are you posing the CAMH donation and the announcement of double murder together?

So, do you believe this is how the Shermans adult children 'bought' the TPS and got M/M as opposed to S/M?

Do you have proof? or Do you have proof that these events are even close to one another in any way?

 

[bluesneakers]

That seems pretty strange. Wonder if there is a video of her stating that??

Why are you posing the CAMH donation and the announcement of double murder together?

So, do you believe this is how the Shermans adult children 'bought' the TPS and got M/M as opposed to S/M?

Do you have proof? or Do you have proof that these events are even close to one another in any way?

The donor was in the crowd at CAMH when they announced the gift. So we know it wasn't the Shermans. Or Drake.

 

[miele.m]

That seems pretty strange. Wonder if there is a video of her stating that??

Why are you posing the CAMH donation and the announcement of double murder together?

So, do you believe this is how the Shermans adult children 'bought' the TPS and got M/M as opposed to S/M?

Do you have proof? or Do you have proof that these events are even close to one another in any way?

Hi there
Yes there is a video of Det. Gomes making the announcement that it was now being investigated as a targeted double murder now and that the adult kids felt ‘happy’ about this. However as was pointed out here recently, probably just a poor choice of words.

I’m only speculating and considering all possibilities, no proof regarding the $100 million donation coming from them. Just something that crossed my mind.

Yes I certainly considered that a $100 million donation to a much needed centre/facility/ in the city could possibly have enough pull to have the TPS announce a D/M vs a M/S if the adult children struck an agreement with them. It’s a huge donation that would help a lot of people in a huge city. But as pointed out here, it is anonymous and wouldn’t benefit the Sherman family because this isn’t how they donated in the past.

I considered it a possibility, yes, but probably an unlikely scenario from the sounds of it now.
Also as has been pointed out here the timing was just a coincidence.

There seem to be a lot of coincidences though in this case.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[miele.m]

The donor was in the crowd at CAMH when they announced the gift. So we know it wasn't the Shermans. Or Drake.

Thanks for this information.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[miele.m]

And furthermore, the Sherman family's PI's would have just as much access to evidence as you and I. They did have the opportunity to examine the bodies, and it is from this that they drew their conclusions. So tell me why they chose to make their findings front page news BEFORE the police had announced any findings from their very extensive investigation. I think that it has been very evident from day one that the Sherman family was not going to accept any idea of a suicide. Their parallel investigation results were so predictable, I knew what they would say before they even started investigating. The whole thing has been a media campaign to keep the Sherman name from being muddied. Sorry if that goes against all the conspiracy cases posted here, but when something smells rotten, its usually rotten. And this case stinks.

It does stink doesn’t it? I smell a dead skunk somewhere but not sure where it’s hiding.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JDG]

The donor was in the crowd at CAMH when they announced the gift. So we know it wasn't the Shermans. Or Drake.

Bluesneakers, Ive just read a number of articles about the donation and none state that the donor was in the crowd. IF the person was in the crowd and yelled out or drew attention to themselves, it would no longer be anonymous right? If you have a link that shows otherwise, thank you.

miele.m. thank you for answering so promptly.

At some point, but who knows when, I hope we get more information about this case. I fear it will become a cold case or that the police will know who/what/why but be unable to prosecute.

I am still hopeful that this 'second lens' will allow the lawyer for the Shermans to speak to some of these conspiracy theories and shed some light on certain aspects of the case without undermining any future prosecution down the road.