Sheri Coleman, sons Garett and Gavin murdered 5-5-09, Columbia, IL. Pt3

[WestSideGal]

This is something I just found - not sure if it's been mentioned yet. On SC's brother's (Mario) MySpace she entered a comment on Apr 30 that said the song on her profile was by one of her good friends and it's her fav song. One of her friends is Steph Jones (SC is listed at the top of her friends list) and she has a playlist of her own songs on her MySpace. I just listened to two of them - Found You Out and Moving On...I wonder if either of these two songs were the one she was talking about.

 

[RR0004]

Surely CC knows that he would come under immediate suspicion as he's the last person to see his family alive.

I will never ever understand how these murdering spouses think they can plan to get around that!

Especially in this day & age with cameras so prevalent!

Do you think he was thinking he could raise enough doubt in a jury's mind to be acquitted? What a risk -- who wants to go thru a trial anyway!!?? And look - he's lost his job and trial will most likely cause him to be so broke he'll never climb out of debt.

It's soooo hard to believe that he'd even consider that LE would just gloss over him & never seriously consider him as the evil doer!!

If so, he's sociopathic to the nth degree!!

...and let's not forget so very pre-meditated. Too bad there's a moratorium on the DP.

 

[~Lisa~]

LOL, of course it doesn't make sense to you because you have a part in your brain that uses logic.

See, I know you know this, but I'll say it anyway, LOL......these guys all think their smarter than the average human..........LE officer, .........Prosecutor,......and even Websleuther....

They should have watched these pages for a few years, of case after case after case and on and on and see that,............they FOOL NO ONE,........they may have been able to lie to their now deceased wife, their parents who think they can do no wrong, and their friends that only see them once or twice a year,.....................

But we know..................we're not fooled by their game face,...............we see the darkness behind that gaze...........

Unfortunately, this case as in so many, the darkness of his gaze wasn't apparent until AFTER he'd acted on his plan.

JMHO
fran

Great post :clap: I couldn't agree more!

 

[Melanie]

Truly. The behavior of the Coleman family speaks volumes about exactly what kind of people they are. All of them. With this and the deer hunting video, I am convinced these are not the kind of people I, nor most people I know, would associate with, or count on as a path to any kind of salvation. Not decent people at all.

I am not on great terms with my MIL - my husband has been some what estranged from her for many years, she was horrible and abusive to him and his brothers growing up - but, if something happened to my DH or family, I would personally call her, or someone close to me would, ASAP, and she would receive a memento if she so wished.

Wow - my brother is highly influencial in the Chriopriactic world. He hunts for a living when he doesn't work. He brings fresh game home for his family to eat during the winter (in Alaska). Both my bro and uncle have had to shoot polar bears in cold blood or risk being killed. Do I fault them for that - no. He feeds and eats off the land, and it's pretty cool (if you can stomach it). None of it goes to waste. I've had buffalo burgers, and moose spaghetti - nothing tastes better than fresh meat - much better than the carp they serve in the stores. His wife grows the most awesomest of vegetables. It's unbelievable (the taste).

I've known my brother had to take a knife to a kill that hadn't passed yet. That's what hunters do.

Mind you, I haven't seen the deer video, but can't imagine that he's the first person to finish off a kill that way. We all don't shop at the local grocer ya know

Just my opinion - that's it.

 

[waterlooinspector]

Sorry pferrin - I'm not dissing SC. She was a wonderful and beautiful lady. CC was lucky she gave him the time of day. I just know that while I'm religious, God fearing and was married to a control freak (Yes - everything was in his name) - I ended up having an affair. The man helped me get out of my he$$ish marriage. Did I use him? Probably. Desperation makes us do desperate things - but murder was not an option I considered. :furious:

I am still religious, and very ashamed for what I did. I had a difficult time dealing with what I'd done - But my minister told me that God works in mysterious ways. So the fact SC was a loving and devoted wife - and I believe she was - having an affair or even a one time event doesn't make her a bad person. On the other hand, I'm not saying she did this. She was a much better person than I was as she stayed with CC and tried to make it work.

Maybe I am hung up on the macho marine thing, so someone help me here. Wasn't Sheri an ex marine herself? I just have a hard time seeing someone with that training and backbone to sign over everything to CC and be as submissive to him as we are portraying her here. I just think she was much stonger and more indepedent than we are alleging.

 

[analytical]

Maybe I am hung up on the macho marine thing, so someone help me here. Wasn't Sheri an ex marine herself? I just have a hard time seeing someone with that training and backbone to sign over everything to CC and be as submissive to him as we are portraying her here. I just think she was much stonger and more indepedent than we are alleging.

Hi.. an obit clearly stated she was in the Air Force and her father's entry in the online guest book stated he was proud when she entered the Air Force.

So that should be correct - I'd thought she was a Marine as well until seeing the above info.

 

[SuziQ]

Wow - my brother is highly influencial in the Chriopriactic world. He hunts for a living when he doesn't work. He brings fresh game home for his family to eat during the winter (in Alaska). Both my bro and uncle have had to shoot polar bears in cold blood or risk being killed. Do I fault them for that - no. He feeds and eats off the land, and it's pretty cool (if you can stomach it). None of it goes to waste. I've had buffalo burgers, and moose spaghetti - nothing tastes better than fresh meat - much better than the carp they serve in the stores. His wife grows the most awesomest of vegetables. It's unbelievable (the taste).

I've known my brother had to take a knife to a kill that hadn't passed yet. That's what hunters do.

Mind you, I haven't seen the deer video, but can't imagine that he's the first person to finish off a kill that way. We all don't shop at the local grocer ya know

Just my opinion - that's it.

IMO, they are referring to the method of strangling and appearing to enjoy it. Not the fact they hunt or have to finish off with a knife. Finishing off an animal is expected. Especially in bow hunting, where it's hard to outright kill a large animal with a single bowshot. But many of us, who are familiar with hunting and in my case I'm surrounded by hunters agree, strangling to do the trick is unheard of. Forget a knife? Hunter faux paux 101! I just can't believe that at least one person nearby didn't have a knife.

 

[kiki the parrot]

Maybe I am hung up on the macho marine thing, so someone help me here. Wasn't Sheri an ex marine herself? I just have a hard time seeing someone with that training and backbone to sign over everything to CC and be as submissive to him as we are portraying her here. I just think she was much stonger and more indepedent than we are alleging

As far as I can tell WI all that's being alleged, by me anyway, is that there were some red flags here--including ownership to property forfeited, husband's name, apparently, on vehicle titles and what would ordinarily be shared marital assets transferred which, in the absence of her murder might not raise so many eyebrows. But in context of wife's untimely demise, have caused some to speculate whether there may have been some kind of financial motive. Farfetched, I realize... guess some of us just like to imagine every wild scenario no matter how remote and unheard of...

ETA: I still don't see how SC's former military experience would necessarily preclude an imbalance of power in her marriage. Afterall I believe CC also served in the military at one time. And I never implied that he exerted physical force or control. In any abusive relationship however it is about control; and a woman's military service hardly immunes or exempts her from those power dynamics in a personal relationship.

arrot:

 

[who knew?]

I'm still stuck on why CC wanted SC's name off the deed. In Illinois (where I'm from), if the property is acquired during the marriage, the property is usually sold and divided between the two in a divorce. Taking one name off does not entitle the other person sole ownership.

www.illinoisprobono.org:
"As a general rule, most property acquired by a husband and wife during the marriage is considered to be marital property.
Examples: Homes and other real estate, savings, investments, pension benefits, health insurance benefits and businesses.

All other property, including property that you brought into the marriage, is considered to be non-marital property. Also, inheritances and gifts made to one of the parties, even during the marriage, are considered to be non-marital property. When you divorce, you are usually entitled to keep your non-marital property.

The law encourages divorcing spouses to divide their property through negotiation and agreement. When the spouses cannot agree, a family court judge must divide the property. It is very important to note that unlike the issue of grounds for divorce, marital misconduct by one spouse cannot be taken into account by the judge when dividing marital property.

Advocacy Tip: Many people incorrectly believe that by keeping property in their name only, they can keep it away from their spouse if they get a divorce. This is simply not true. "


And I was also looking to see if (in Illinois) SC's family was entitled to any of her possessions if she didn't have a will. If she had one, then it will need to be followed - but if she doesn't, then her family is entitled.

www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/intestate-succession-in-illinois
"What Other Parties May Have an Interest in the Intestate Estate?
There are many parties that may have a share in an intestate estate besides the spouse, the deceased's children, and the deceased's immediate family. Some of these parties include:

Grandparents
Great-Grandparents
Step-Brother and Step-Sisters"

 

[fran]

We can speculate there was abuse in the home, but I haven't heard anyone who knew them voice this opinion. As a couple, they were active with the boys, the church, and the community. I would expect people to be coming out of the woodwork to tell tales of suspected abuse from Chris be it mental, verbal, or physical. We don't know he controlled Sheri. I wish someone who interacted with them on a regular basis would talk and fill in some details.

I'm still trying to catch up but I wanted to comment on this, SS. Hope it's ok.

Although we haven't *heard* anyone step up to tell of any abuse behind closed doors of the Coleman home, we have already received one bit of information that points towards the possibility.............ie the home being in the husband's name and the autos as well. IMHO, this MAY just be the tip of the iceberg. After all, what is abuse? but CONTROL.

Just because Sheri's friends haven't voiced publicly the possibility of abuse, doesn't mean they haven't talked to LE. During the Nancy Cooper case, it took weeks and sometimes months, to find out the details of the level with which the husband, Brad Cooper, controlled his wife. The first thing, immediately, we found out was him taking her off the credit cards, etc. It took well into the case, before we found out more details that turned it into a very ugly picture, IMHO. All the while, Nancy's friends were talking to LE, they just weren't broadcasting those conversations.

Seeee........this is WHY I've posted on here a couple of times for anyone that knew Sheri to contact LE. They may know something, ANYTHING, that just MAY give LE another looke into the psyche of the NOT suspect, Chris Coleman. They may know situations that had arisen during the couple's marriage that Sheri confided in them. It could be a PIECE of the PUZZLE that LE needs.

I believe we have a LOT MORE to learn about this seemingly picture of the perfect American Family. Just the fact it ended in murder, tells me, there's soooo much more going on here.

JMHO
fran

 

[kiki the parrot]

I'm still stuck on why CC wanted SC's name off the deed. In Illinois (where I'm from), if the property is acquired during the marriage, the property is usually sold and divided between the two in a divorce. Taking one name off does not entitle the other person sole ownership.

www.illinoisprobono.org:
"As a general rule, most property acquired by a husband and wife during the marriage is considered to be marital property.
Examples: Homes and other real estate, savings, investments, pension benefits, health insurance benefits and businesses.

All other property, including property that you brought into the marriage, is considered to be non-marital property. Also, inheritances and gifts made to one of the parties, even during the marriage, are considered to be non-marital property. When you divorce, you are usually entitled to keep your non-marital property.

The law encourages divorcing spouses to divide their property through negotiation and agreement. When the spouses cannot agree, a family court judge must divide the property. It is very important to note that unlike the issue of grounds for divorce, marital misconduct by one spouse cannot be taken into account by the judge when dividing marital property.

Advocacy Tip: Many people incorrectly believe that by keeping property in their name only, they can keep it away from their spouse if they get a divorce. This is simply not true. "


And I was also looking to see if (in Illinois) SC's family was entitled to any of her possessions if she didn't have a will. If she had one, then it will need to be followed - but if she doesn't, then her family is entitled.

www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/intestate-succession-in-illinois
"What Other Parties May Have an Interest in the Intestate Estate?
There are many parties that may have a share in an intestate estate besides the spouse, the deceased's children, and the deceased's immediate family. Some of these parties include:

Grandparents
Great-Grandparents
Step-Brother and Step-Sisters"

Of course many people may not know exactly how the law reads. The only other reasonable explanation is if there were a large debt or Chapter 7/11/13 planned eg in SC's name, in order to protect those assets. That's the only other thing I can think of anyway. :waitasec:

arrot:

 

[who knew?]

Of course many people may not know exactly how the law reads. The only other reasonable explanation is if there were a large debt or Chapter 7/11/13 planned eg in SC's name, in order to protect those assets. That's the only other thing I can think of anyway. :waitasec:

arrot:

I may be wrong, but what I understand is that (at least in Illinois), you can file bankruptcy and keep both your house and vehicles (reaffirmation). I know a few people who have - but don't know what the circumstances surrounding their cases were. When you reaffirm, you continue to make payments - nothing changes. The bankruptcy discharges the medical and credit card bills - other items you don't reaffirm on.

I'd hate to think he went to all this trouble to keep a house he'll never be entering again considering his new home will have bars - and NOT the kind with strippers. (At least not the kind of strippers he would be interested in!) JMO!!!!! Anyway, if he knew the law regarding this, then he may have murdered the whole family, as others have said, to avoid divorce, child support, spousal support - AND to have a new beginning...... in the industry???

 

[analytical]

Sheri was also on Friendster. I don't believe I've seen this posted anywhere.
Just a photo with 2 friends and no entries.

http://profiles.friendster.com/25239134

 

[Lindadanette]

He wasn't actually framing a person. He simply wanted the murder to look like retribution from someone who he may have spied on.

It was central to his alibi and defense strategy. The police will have to look into his work activities and they will find that there will be people , significant people who will *not* want this line of inquiry to hit the public record.

If he ever gets tried this, stuff will dominate the trial and tv coverage leading to possibility of reasonable doubt.

It's not only Chris Coleman who is worried about this case.

I have thought that myself. If he is a true sociopath, he would have found a treasure trove at JMM. I can easily believe that he manufactured the threats to "disarm" JM and frighten his wife (two birds with one stone).
as a part of his escape plan. He must have hated them both.

 

[fran]

While I do appreciate what you went through and what you are saying, we do not have any indication anything of the sort was happening with Sheri and Chris. We know things were not perfect with the affair and other things going on inside the home, but I am not ready to characterize it as abuse yet.

Sheri was not being controlled to the point of no friends, not being allowed to talk to her family, or where others in the community noticed problems evidently. There are signs even in a family where no one speaks about it and the abuse isn't done out in the open. Someone would have seen something or Sheri would have said something to a close friend/confidant.

FWIW, there was one case I followed here, it was a majorally high profile case at the time. During the first month, I received communication from someone acquainted with the NOT suspect. Believe me, what they told me, made the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end. It wasn't first hand knowledge of abuse in the home, but more of an inside look at the NOT suspects psyche.

Up to that point, there was hardly anything we could put our finger on as to abuse. Just little hints, such as in this case so far. But what this person told me, I felt LE needed to know, post haste. I begged them to contact LE with what they knew. I told them, even if it was anonomously, it was some of what LE NEEDED to know about what they were dealing with.

I don't know if they ever contacted LE. I don't even recall their nic. But, it doesn't matter, LE was receiving info behind the scenes. Enough leads and EVIDENCE that the perp is awaiting trial now, for murder.

I don't know if it is the same type of scenario here. But the control issues are blatently evident. The outward signs...............Signs no one sees unless they're looking for them. The Rochas didn't see the *outward signs* either. It wasn't until they found out about Amber, that they realized the *signs* they had all observed separately, here and there, led to the murder of their beautiful Laci and Conner. It took them a week out of the spotlight and various family members coming over and putting down on paper that they saw the ugly truth.

JMHO
fran

 

[RR0004]

As far as I can tell WI all that's being alleged, by me anyway, is that there were some red flags here--including ownership to property forfeited, husband's name, apparently, on vehicle titles and what would ordinarily be shared marital assets transferred which, in the absence of her murder might not raise so many eyebrows. But in context of wife's untimely demise, have caused some to speculate whether there may have been some kind of financial motive. Farfetched, I realize... guess some of us just like to imagine every wild scenario no matter how remote and unheard of...

ETA: I still don't see how SC's former military experience would necessarily preclude an imbalance of power in her marriage. Afterall I believe CC also served in the military at one time. And I never implied that he exerted physical force or control. In any abusive relationship however it is about control; and a woman's military service hardly immunes or exempts her from those power dynamics in a personal relationship.

arrot:

For all we know, it may have been her only way out of a troubled marriage. Like- "You want out...fine leave, but no way I'm giving up the house (that very large asset)!"

 

[christee]

I hope you don't mean me because I get logged out often on WS or I lose my internet connection. Sometimes I forget to check the remember me icon at log in and once I close my browser window or if I lose my isp connection I have to log back in.

I am going to stay logged in and go do dishes. I'll see if I get logged out again before I get back to the board after doing dishes.

Just saw your post and started laughing!!!

No your safe! I was referring to a new poster who had posted only 1 time. I just thought it was strange!

 

[SuziQ]

Of course many people may not know exactly how the law reads. The only other reasonable explanation is if there were a large debt or Chapter 7/11/13 planned eg in SC's name, in order to protect those assets. That's the only other thing I can think of anyway. :waitasec:

arrot:

I think it was reported on NG, that the Coleman's had little debt.

 

[pres101]

True. Murder/Suicides are too prevalent in our society.

However, If Chris were going to harm himself...he would have done it right after the murders.

I do not think there is any chance he will harm anyone else either. Cowards kill women and children in their sleep.

You are correct. Cowards and only cowards do that.

 

[kiki the parrot]

I may be wrong, but what I understand is that (at least in Illinois), you can file bankruptcy and keep both your house and vehicles (reaffirmation). I know a few people who have - but don't know what the circumstances surrounding their cases were. When you reaffirm, you continue to make payments - nothing changes. The bankruptcy discharges the medical and credit card bills - other items you don't reaffirm on.

I'd hate to think he went to all this trouble to keep a house he'll never be entering again considering his new home will have bars - and NOT the kind with strippers. (At least not the kind of strippers he would be interested in!) JMO!!!!! Anyway, if he knew the law regarding this, then he may have murdered the whole family, as others have said, to avoid divorce, child support, spousal support - AND to have a new beginning...... in the industry???

I'm no finance wiz lol and laws vary by state but from what I read if there's equity and the exemption is insufficient to protect the equity, a Chapter 13 could then still be filed to avoid losing house. None of it makes sense to me, especially if SuziQ's right and there's not much debt. Obviously we're missing some facts here...

arrot:

http://www.moranlaw.net/keepthehouse.htm