Toronto Police investigation of Barry & Honey Sherman murders sealed by the Crown to cover up who committed the targeted murders

There is compeling evidence that shows that 5 years ago Justin Trudeau conspired to have his August 26, 2015 election campaign fundraisers murdered. Justin Trudeau had motive to conspire to murder Barry and Honey Sherman. An ongoing RCMP investigation of his election campaign fundraiser for the Lobbying Commissioner and an Apotex lawsuit put Justin Trudeau in legal jeopardy. The fundraiser was a prohibited gift. Justin Trudeau accepting the prohibited gift meant that he violated the Lobbying Act and the Canada Elections Act.

Violating the Lobbying Act had no legal consequences for either Justin Trudeau or Barry Sherman.

“The RCMP have never, ever followed up. The RCMP then rubber-stamps or whitewashes whatever Lobbying Act activity has happened.” House of Commons

However, violating the Canada Elections Act meant that Justin Truduea could have lost his seat in the House of Commons and he couldn’t be a candidate in another election for 5 years. It would have meant the end of his political career.

“The Canada Elections Act also sets out a series of disqualifications that apply exclusively to electoral candidacy. … Current disqualifications include the following: A person found guilty of an illegal or corrupt electoral practice (as defined in section 502 of the Canada Elections Act) is disqualified from contesting a federal election for either five or seven years and, if he or she has been elected, may be required to vacate his or her seat in the House of Commons. Illegal practices include wilfully exceeding the spending limit or obstructing the electoral process. Corrupt practices include voting more than once or accepting a prohibited gift or other advantageParliament of Canada

Conspiracy

465 (1) (a) every one who conspires with any one to commit murder or to cause another person to be murdered, whether in Canada or not, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a maximum term of imprisonment for life;

A Court Order dated 10 NOV 2017 rendered by Kevin Aalto, Prothonotary ordering the Lobbying Commissioner to “unredact the Preserved Redactions and to deliver such redacted materials to the Applicants” provided motive for Justin Trudeau to conspire to commit murder.

The Court Order was part of an Apotex lawsuit against the Lobbying Commissioner – Federal Court Number T-761-17 APOTEX INC. ET AL v. KAREN SHEPHERD ET AL. Nature of the proceeding  S. 18.1 Application for Judicial Review. The Prothonotary order was made as a result of the Commissioner of Lobbying redacting Justin Trudeau’s name from material evidence in the ongoing RCMP investigation of Justin Trudeau’s August 26, 2015 election campaign fundraiser. That court order put Justin Trudeau in legal jeopardy. Justin Trudeau could have been “required to vacate his seat in House of Commons” for violating the Canada Elections Act – accepting a prohibited gift or other advantage.

On December 13, 2017, the day of the targeted murders of Justin Trudeau’s August 26, 2015 election campaign fundraisers Barry and Honey Sherman, Justin Trudeau had both the Ethics Commissioner and the Lobbying Commissioner removed as commissioners. Their removal was done during ongoing investigations by both commissioners into Justin Trudeau violating federal laws while campaigning in the 2015 federal election. Both commissioners were essentially fired for investigating Justin Trudeau for violating federal laws during the 2015 election campaign.

The 10 NOV 2017 Court Order and Justin Trudeau removing the Ethics Commissioner and the Lobbying Commissioner on the day of the targeted murders of his August 26, 2015 election campaign fundraisers Barry and Honey Sherman are elements of a conspiracy to commit murder. The RCMP are involved. They became involved the day the Lobbying Commissioner had the RCMP investigate Justin Trudeau’s August 26, 2015 election campaign fundraiser/fundraisers.

Lobbying Act
Advice to peace officers

(7) If, during an investigation under this section, the Commissioner believes on reasonable grounds that a person has committed an offence under this or any other Act of Parliament or of the legislature of a province, the Commissioner shall advise a peace officer having jurisdiction to investigate the alleged offence and immediately suspend the Commissioner’s investigation.

The RCMP started investigating Justin Trudeau and his August 26, 2015 election campaign fundraiser/fundraisers after the Lobbying Commissioner found evidence that federal laws were broken by Mr. Sherman’s contribution to the 2015 election campaign:

“There is basis to conclude that the private interests of (REDACTED) were advanced to a high degree, & that a sense of obligation was created by Mr. Sherman’s contribution to the 2015 election campaign” Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada (OCL)

A Nov 3, 2016 OCL taped recorded interview with Barry Sherman was the primary material evidence OCL used to have RCMP launch a “full investigation” of Justin Trudeau’s Aug 26, 2015 fundraiser. OCL determined the tape recording provided evidence Justin Trudeau broke federal laws. Apotex filed a lawsuit against the Lobbying Commissioner regarding the redacted name in transcripts of that Nov 3, 2016 taped recorded interview.

The Toronto Police know who murdered Barry and Honey Sherman. So does the Crown. The Crown sealed the Toronto Police murder investigation files and evidence to protect the people who committed the murders for Justin Trudeau’s benefit.

Crime scene evidence: restraint marks, Honey Sherman’s bloody lip & nose, the surreptitious entry, the person who entered the Shermans’ home Dec 14, 2017 for 29 minutes & the ongoing RCMP investigation of Justin Trudeau’s election campaign fundraiser/fundraisers implicates RCMP officers in their murders.

Crime scene evidence shows murderers gained access to the Sherman home by the front door. No forced entry means Barry and Honey Sherman’s murderers knocked on front door. It is plausible that Honey Sherman let her murderers in after her murderers identified themselves as police officers. Restraint marks and Honey Sherman’s bloody lip and nose supports assertion that she was forcibly restrained by police officers.

Keable Commission supports assertion that RCMP officers are viable suspects in Barry & Honey Sherman targeted murders. 15 RCMP officers were charged/tried for: conspiracy, B&E, kidnapping & forcible detention. Indicted RCMP officers claimed they “were just following (PM Pierre Trudeau) orders.

Former Toronto police Chief Mark Saunders said he has had to be careful with what he said about the case because he knows “for a fact” that the Shermans’ killers are watching his televised remarks.

Toronto Police Chief Mark Saunders also stated that his officers interviewed the mystery man who spent 29 minutes inside the home of Barry and Honey Sherman while they lay dead in the basement.

“I can tell you we knew who the person was, why they were there, (the person) was interviewed,”

Note, only one person entered the home yet Police Chief Saunders said Toronto Police knew why “they” were there – they means the person of interest was part of an organization. The RCMP is an organization. RCMP were at the time investigating Justin Trudeau’s fundraiser/fundraisers. Wiretapping is tool in RCMP investigations, especially when it involves the Prime Minister of Canada. It is highly plausible that a RCMP officer entered the Shermans’ home to remove wiretaps and/or incriminating evidence.

Parties to offence

Where two or more persons are playing an active role in the commission of a crime, each becomes a co-principal to that offence. When this is the case, it is not necessary to determine exactly which person committed which element of the offence. Rather, every act done to commit the offence is deemed to have been committed by all co-principals. A person can be a principal to an offence despite not actually committing the offence with their own hands. This occurs where they instead direct an innocent agent to commit the offence in their place.

Related briefing: Justin Trudeau is the one person who had motive to have Barry and Honey Sherman murdered

Analysis of evidence in the “targeted” killings of Barry & Honey Sherman concludes murders were politically motivated

5 years ago Justin Trudeau’s 2015 election campaign fundraisers Barry and Honey Sherman were targeted and killed. Mass media and government officials claim no motive for the double homicides has been found despite there being substantial evidence to support an inference that the murders were politically motivated.

What was the primary motive for the targeted murders of Barry & Honey Sherman? To answer that one must first examine why lead Toronto police investigator, Det.-Sgt. Susan Gomes publicly stated that Barry and Honey Sherman were targeted and killed? “I believe they were targeted,” The word “targeted” was specifically chosen to describe Toronto’s 2017 homicides #64 and #65. What was Det.-Sgt. Susan Gomes revealing to the public by calling the double homicides “targeted” killing?

Targeted killing is defined as an assassination by a “government authority” of an individual(s) for a perceived threat. That’s what Toronto Police were telling Canadians when they said Barry & Honey Sherman were “targeted” & killed. Toronto Police stated publicly from the very beginning that “there was no sign of forced entry into their home”. That is referred to as surreptitious entry. Toronto Police publicly stating that the murderers entered the home of Barry and Honey Sherman via surreptitious entry is of major significance. It supports the discovery finding that the Shermans were targeted and killed by a “government authority”.

Evidence of markings being found on the wrists of both Barry and Honey Sherman, indicated they had been tied up, yet no ties or ropes were found at the scene. This too has major significance in that it confirms both Barry and Honey were restrained, forcibly detained (were handcuffed) before being killed. Both being forcibly restrained, leaving marks, provides evidence it wasn’t a murder suicide. No ties or ropes were found at the scene proves the killers took the “restraints” (handcuffs) with them.

Restraint markings on their wrists, the Toronto Police Services stating that the Shermans were targeted and killed and that their murderers gained access via surreptitious entry all lead to the conclusion that Barry and Honey Sherman were targeted and killed by police officers. Which police officers? RCMP. Why?

1) Targeted killing is defined as an assassination by a “government authority” of an individual(s) for a perceived threat. A RCMP officer is a government authority. They are authorized by the federal government to uphold and enforce government enacted and imposed laws across Canada.

2) RCMP officers contend that they are authorized by government appointed adjudicators to enter private premises to install listening or video devices or recover evidence in support of “an ongoing criminal investigation”. The power so granted authorizing surreptitious entry allows the RCMP to utilize whatever means to achieve entry they found most expedient. Thus, access could be obtained by forcing doors or windows or via Realtor lock box, or simply through trickery or coercion. Further, if RCMP officers acting under Part IV.1 are implicitly authorized to make entry, s. 25 of the Code would permit them “to effect such entry by overcoming force” a property owner is normally entitled to assert, to prevent anyone, including the police, from entering the premises without permission.

Motive for targeted murders of Barry and Honey Sherman

At the time of the targeted murders, the RCMP were conducting a criminal investigation of Barry and Honey Sherman’s August 26, 2015 fundraiser for 2015 election candidate Justin Trudeau. The RCMP investigation was commenced using Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying (OCL) tape recorded interview with Barry Sherman on Nov 3, 2016. During the tape recorded interview, Mr Sherman openly discussed a fundraiser held at his house on August 26, 2015, which featured Liberal candidates Michael Levitt and Justin Trudeau. Because OCL launched an RCMP investigation of the August 26, 2015 fundraiser for Justin Trudeau based on the content of the tape recorded Nov 3, 2016 interview Apotex (Barry Sherman) filed a law suit (Court number T-761-17) seeking a transcript of the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying interview with lobbyist Barry Sherman, or a copy of the recording.

Justin Trudeau responded by paying the Office of Commissioner of Lobbying $400,000 to obstruct/defeat Barry Sherman suit & a court hearing that was to be held on Thursday, the 8th day of February 2018, at 9:30 to address the Lobbying Commissioner KAREN SHEPHERD refusing to comply with a court order that “redacted” documents that detail the taped interview between OCL & Barry Sherman must be uncensored & handed over to Apotex.

The court order was made as a result of the Commissioner of Lobbying redacting Justin Trudeau’s name from material evidence in an ongoing RCMP investigation. Complying with the court order would prove Lobbying Commissioner REDACTED Justin Trudeau’s name from the transcript in order to conceal that Justin Trudeau broke the law:

“There is basis to conclude that the private interests of (REDACTED) were advanced to a high degree, & that a sense of obligation was created by Mr. Sherman’s contribution to the 2015 election campaign.”

In an email to Brian H. Greenspan photographic evidence was provided that showed that the Sherman’s home was under surveillance by the RCMP.

Only the RCMP has jurisdiction (government authority) to conduct a criminal investigation for the Federal government’s Office of Commissioner of Lobbying.

Direct quote from Administering the Lobbying Act (December 2011) :

The peace officer having jurisdiction to investigate the matter, generally the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) in the case of the Lobbying Act, will consider the case in consultation with legal counsel at the Department of Justice and federal prosecutors at the Department of Public Prosecutions. Together, they will determine whether or not to lay charges.”

Since the ongoing RCMP investigation involved a high profile government of Canada official the RCMP claim that they are authorized to make surreptitious entry, or simply through trickery or coercion. RCMP officers also claim that they are permitted “to effect such entry by overcoming force a property owner”.

In Eccles v. Bourque, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 739, it was contended that s. 25(1) of the Criminal Code authorized trespass by the police in order to effect an arrest. The basis is that the police (RCMP) are entitled, in limited circumstances, to enter private property without consent to effect an arrest – detain a person.

People detained or arrested by police officers and the RCMP are usually forcibly restrained using handcuffs, either metal or plastic. A traditional form of plastic handcuffs are cable ties. Cable ties leave unique marks on wrists of those being arrested by police (RCMP). Forensic pathologist confirmed that the markings on the wrists of both Shermans, indicates they had been restrained (forcibly detained) with ties before they were murdered. Toronto Police confirmed Barry and Honey Sherman’s murderers took the restraints with them.

Why would the restraints be removed from the wrists of the victims and from the crime scene? Restraints are material evidence that could be traced back to the murderers. Canadian police forces have and use a specific type of cable tie. The markings on the wrists of Barry and Honey Sherman can be matched with impressions made by any specific type of tie mfg today.

Crime scene evidence clearly leads to the conclusion that Barry & Honey Sherman were murdered by police officers. Both had restraint marks on their wrists (were handcuffed) & Honey Sherman had cuts on her lip & nose, suggesting that she had struggled with assailants & was forced face down on pool tiles. The evidence is telling us that at some point Honey Sherman sensed that the intruders were going to kill her and out a fear for her life she put up a fight. The cuts on her lip & nose is telling us she was forced to the ground by a police officer(s) who used his or her knee to forcibly hold Honey Sherman’s head and face to the ground as they handcuffed Honey Sherman’s hands behind her back.

It is important to note that police officers and the RCMP do not have the authority to make surreptitious entry or “to effect such entry by overcoming force a property owner”. The Supreme Court of Canada, Wiretap Reference, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 697 Date: 1984-12-20 ruled that police surreptitious entry is unlawful:

“Until such time as Parliament speaks specifically on this matter, I am of the view that an unlawful entry to install a listening device is an unauthorized and unjustified use of police powers. If the authorization to intercept did purport to sanction such an entry, the authorization would be invalid in that respect. Judges simply do not have the power to permit anyone, even police officers, to commit unlawful acts.