Return to Transcripts main page

Crime and Justice With Ashleigh Banfield

Homeless Man Brutally Hurt and Killed; Dumb Plot Added More Jail Time; Corpse Disappeared in Casket; Woman Charged With Killing Her Twin Sister After Car Accident. Aired 6-8p ET

Aired January 31, 2018 - 18:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[18:00:00] ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, HLN HOST: Hello, everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield. This is Crime and Justice.

All across America, people work jobs where at any minute they could face some difficulties. But coming under attack? Police say that is exactly what

happened outside of Charlotte, North Carolina at a gas station to the attendant there. The mini mart clerk and her 19-year-old son.

Out of nowhere, a so-called customer puts the clerk`s son in a headlock with a gun to his head. He charges behind the counter then and that

assailant whips out a pistol and demands that the clerk that she opens the register. All the while, look closely.

There is a 4-year-old grandson of that clerk witnessing all of this before running to safety. By the end of it, the suspect escaped with just $30 of

cigars. All that for 30 bucks worth of cigars.

Police say he jumped into a getaway car later found abandoned just a few miles away. By some miracle there were no injuries, major injuries. Anyway,

physical injuries because of this attack. The police are on the hunt tonight for that guy. He`s dangerous.

They also want his getaway driver because he was part of all of that and let`s remember the little boy witnessed all of that. He was part of that.

Three women, each facing up to 45 years behind bars for a deadly attack on a 51-year-old homeless and helpless man in Philadelphia.

So we actually see it all happened on video. The car pulls up to a gas station and adults and just pour out six of them about running straight to

that man and literally clobbering him, stomping him to death, using everything they can. A hammer, the leg of a chair, mace, their fists and

their feet. And effectively they beat Robert Barnes into a coma.

Just when it seems some of the attackers have had enough, they go back and they continue the assault even though onlookers yell for them to stop. They

even show a little kid what they did.

Months later, that victim died. Complications from a blunt force impact. The three women are pleading guilty to voluntary manslaughter while the

three juveniles already pled guilty to third-degree murder.

And again, a little 10-year-old apparently the cause of all of that having said he thought that he had been beaten and a racial slur had been tossed

his way.

This is weird. Anything but casual dining. Glasses and plates and chairs and fist beginning to fly when a massive brawl breaks out on Saturday night

at this New Jersey Denny`s restaurant.

A lot of stuff flying through the air, it`s a lot of people, too. But only one man so far has been arrested and that was on an outstanding warrant.

More arrest however, could be on the way. The local prosecutor`s office said the incident can only be described as nonsense, nevertheless, they

want to find the people involved. And that`s where you come in. If you know anything, say something.

I want to take you to Florida now where we`re going to begin in an Orlando suburb. Lake County. Ever been there? Because this should have been obvious

from the moment Robert O`Hare bought and delivered a whole bunch of toys to the children living on his street. Nice.

The gifts were big and bright and shiny and not to mention expensive. But they were expensive because investigators found that they came complete

with cameras. Cameras in hope that Mr. O`Hare could catch those children undressing in their rooms.

But if you think the story ends when the parents and the police discovered the twisted plan? Think again. Twisted does not even begin to describe what

Robert O`Hare wanted to do next.

According to the investigators, there is good reason that these mug shots go from happy, to nervous, to really worried. They say the day before his

sentencing on those video voyeurism and kiddie porn changes, Robert O`Hare gave his mother a secret code from behind bars.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As far as the weird scale goes, it`s off the charts totally. Hearing a phone conversation with his mother he passed on a set of

numbers that ended up being a secret code that they would use to send messages back and forth and that code was deciphered it stated "kill

Briggs." Well, Judge Briggs happens to be the judge that is presiding over these previous charges.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[18:05:03] BANFIELD: You heard right. The smiling fella apparently officer say he was trying to engineer the murder of the presiding judge in his

case. And that code was supposed to be given to a hit man with the name `the rabbi." It`s like a movie.

But the good news is the judge is OK tonight and was able to sentence Robert O`Hare to 20 years in prison. And now because of this whole hit man

business, Robert O`Hare could be facing a lot more time. So stay tuned for the next round of mug shots and what his mood is in those.

With me now, Ray Caputo, reporter for News 96.5 WDBO in Orlando. Ray, you cannot make this stuff up. But let`s start at the beginning with the

original crime for which he is now serving about 20 years. And it`s about the kiddie porn. He was truly buying gifts for the kids on the street and

the parents were unsuspecting of it all?

RAY CAPUTO, REPORTER, NEWS 96.5 WDBO: Yes, Ashleigh. This guy is a sociopath. He is a really good liar. In 2015, that`s when police finally

caught up to him. They actually caught him of all places downloading kiddie porn in a coffee shop.

I`ve actually been to this coffee shop. It`s in Mount Dora, it`s a sleepy little community it`s not what you would expect. And he, when they caught

up to him, they not only found porn on his computer, the most disgusting type of porn imaginable.

You know, grown men with young kids as young as 3, but they also found materials that he used to produce it. They found a telescope with a web cam

on it that he was sticking out his window when recording neighborhood girls. And then after that they found that he was putting a telescopic

camera in toys and gave it to a couple of neighborhood children.

BANFIELD: OK. So, stop right there. Stop right there.

(CROSSTALK)

CAPUTO: It looks like a twisted funny film.

BANFIELD: Yes, hold right there because I want to show some of the pictures that we got from the case if we can pop those photographs up. They

are juke boxes. What kid wouldn`t freak out if you were given this juke box? And this is what the inside workings of the juke box looks like.

If you take the back off, look what was inside, all this fancy cameras. I don`t know if the cameras were live, Ray. I don`t know if anybody knows at

this point that the cameras were live or if he was somehow going to retrieve whatever these juke boxes could keep out to see.

But effectively where did the juke boxes end up and what kind of pictures came from those toys?

CAPUTO: Well, the police ended up -- the content on the juke box as if they were plugged in would stream. So I was actually reading over the

arrest affidavit today. And I`ll tell you what, Ashleigh, I didn`t eat lunch because the description of some of these videos is absolutely

disturbing.

But mostly just a couple of young teen girls walking around doing things in their bedrooms like teen girls do. You know, just getting out of the

shower, washing their hair.

So, it`s quite diabolical that these young girls who had no clue in the sanctity of their own bedrooms had no clue this pervert was monitoring them

and likely sharing this porn with other people.

BANFIELD: It`s so horrifying. I mean, so many facets to his crime for which he`s already been sentenced. The child porn videos he said he had in

his possession that are hard core. I mean, and I`m just going to be graphic here because you need to know how bad this stuff was in order to know how

bad this guy is.

These are kids ages 3 to 12 in full penetration engaging in oral sex both receiving and giving. A 3-year-old. I mean, these are images and videos

that are just horrendous. The videos from the juke boxes and like you said, the telescopic lens out his window into the neighbor`s window depicted a

14-year-old girl.

And through those miniature juke boxes, am I correct, Ray, they saw at least one of the images was -- I`m not sure if it was a child or someone

sitting down and the juke could see right up their shorts.

CAPUTO: Yes. I mean, there were many images actually, Ashleigh, of children unclothe and in compromising states. So it just wasn`t that. He

had plenty of child porn on his computer. Again, not only stuff that he was downloading from the internet that coffee shop among other places, but also

stuff like this that he actually produced and was pretty, you know, pretty precarious stuff.

BANFIELD: So he`s clearly not a good person. We know that. He`s the lowest of the low. And then the story takes the second twist and we have a whole

new crime now alleged and I have to say alleged because he is going to face the music on this one. He`s already put away for 20 years on the last one.

This one is all about the judge in the case, the judge who sentenced him to 20 years. Judge Briggs. So walk me through the narrative of what this time

of Robert O`Hare is alleged to have done behind bars, sucking his mother into the plot with codes and hit plans. Just tell me what happened.

[18:10:01] CAPUTO: First off, I will say to you that this isn`t surprising given the fact that this is a guy who put telescopic lenses in juke boxes.

But it`s pretty ridiculous. So what he did was him and his mother had code and they would associate numbers with letters. OK.

And police were on to this early on that they`re using this to fly below the radar. Because of course when you are in jail all of your conversations

were recorded. So they put these codes together. Now the day before he is supposed to get sentenced for this child porn, he calls his mom and he`s

talking to her and asked her to speak to her family friend known as the rabbi saying that the rabbi can do something for...

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: OK. Hold on. Is that, just a second, is that the guy, the rabbi is a guy named Al? Am I making the right connection? If that`s the guy I

want to put that...

(CROSSTALK)

CAPUTO: Yes.

BANFIELD: OK. Perfect. Hold your thought for a moment. I`m going to ask the controller to put up screen number two. Because this code breaking is

probably the dumbest code I have ever seen. You did not need the wind talkers to get this code.

It`s basically every letter of the alphabet. You know, A is number one, b is number two. It`s that simple. And if you look at the numbers that he

gave his mom, 5, 16, 23, 24, 13, 16, 16, it spelled out "Al still waiting."

And let`s put up that next set of codes. Because the next set of codes was real clear. Nothing subtle here. "Kill Briggs." The judge`s name is Briggs.

"Kill Briggs." The only thing he might have done to try to get it a little more clever was he actually put the numbers backwards. So you had to read

it backwards.

But, I mean, honestly, Ray, how long did it take for them to break this code?

CAPUTO: It didn`t take long, Ashleigh. In fact, he was recently charged, but it didn`t take them long at all. I mean, it`s ironic that this was the

guy he is a sociopath and he`s quite clever but this was one of his...

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: The dumbest.

CAPUTO: ... most clever deeds.

BANFIELD: Yes. I`m going to read -- I`m going to read the transcripts on the phone call with his mom after he, you know, gave the numbers to her. He

said all right, listen up.

"So when I get off the phone, call rabbi and just tell him, all right. Maybe you guys can go have lunch sometime and then you know, you could --

you`ll understand what I`m trying to get to." Mom says, "yes, of course I do. Yes. Mom says "you want me to give this to him?" He said "yes." And the

son says, "yes."

"So I want you to tell him don`t give it to him, just kind of like, you know, show it and put it back in your wallet."

So this is the information. The next day, he has another phone call with mom and mom said "he knows what you want, but he can`t do it. He`s just a

rabbi." And that`s that.

So obviously it didn`t get very far. If I can I want to bring in Patrick Johnson. Patrick Johnson is the former warden of the -- you have to help me

with the pronunciation here but I think Chautauqua? Chautauqua County jail in New York.

PATRICK JOHNSON, FORMER WARDEN, CHAUTAUQUA COUNTY JAIL: Chautauqua. Yes, it is.

BANFIELD: So it`s not the jail in question and it`s real hard to get jail officials involved in the case to talk about the evidence in the case, but

you can help me get some insight into how dumb these people when they have their conversations and they set their hit jobs up.

Walk me through how you are on to these guys and how you get through the hours and hours of phone calls to hit the money like that.

JOHNSON: Well, as the gentleman said earlier, we do record every phone call that`s made by the inmates inside the facilities and the housing units

to the outside. Even if they are going to call their attorneys there is a recorded message that says the phone call will be recorded so they know

that they should not, you know, give any confidence to information to their attorneys.

But sometimes it takes a long time to sip through all the conversations to find exactly what we`re looking for.

BANFIELD: Do you go through all of them?

JOHNSON: No, not unless we have a reasonable suspicion that something is going on. Because you know, we just don`t have the staff to sit there and

listen to everybody`s recordings all day long. That would be really expensive and feasible.

BANFIELD: So you lead me to the next question and that is how do you know something is going on. Someone has got to tip you off.

JOHNSON: Well, yes, that`s usually how it happens. Inmates need something from staff quite a bit from management. You know, so it`s kind of a give-

and-take. You know, we need information and they have information. They need favors from us and sometimes there is a tradeoff there that they give

us inside information about what`s going on inside the facility.

If anything dangerous is happening or they know of a crime that may be committed by another inmate whether it`s attacking inmates or attacking

staff having something done on the outside or bringing contraband...

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: There is really no honor among thieves and nobody would know that better than you. Warden, thanks for being with me. I want to come

visit you and see your jail sometime and talk to you in person.

JOHNSON: You are more than welcome.

BANFIELD: Thank you. I want to bring in defense attorney and CNN and HLN legal analyst Joey Jackson, he joins me now. This code is this the dumbest

thing.

[18:15:02] JOEY JACKSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: It took a while to figure out, right?

BANFIELD: Dear God.

JACKSON: So there is a few morals to the story.

BANFIELD: Yes.

JACKSON: One as the warden has mentioned, all calls are recorded, right? So if he`s going to say something, know that there could be liability.

BANFIELD: Even in code.

JACKSON: You got to be a little bit more creative than this, Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: Right.

JACKSON: Number two which is unfortunate here, he subjected his mother to a criminal offense by virtue of having her aid and a bet, right, when he

says, look, I need you to get this information. And she does it and reports back. Now she is subjected to criminal liability.

And of course, number three, you don`t want to go after a prosecutor or judge for regular reasons, but the other reason is there`s other judges and

there`s other prosecutors and you still get sentenced and prosecuted anyway, so what`s the point.

BANFIELD: By the way, 20 years for the porn, how much for trying to hit a federal judge do you think?

JACKSON: Life.

BANFIELD: He`s not a federal judge.

JACKSON: A judge, a judge or prosecutor, state judge like.

BANFIELD: Dumb, dumb, and dumb. And yucky, just yucky and dumb all together. Joey, thank you for that. My thanks to Ray Caputo, as well and

the warden.

A mystery in Texas tonight after a young woman`s body disappears from the funeral home and is never seen again. How does that happen? It turns out no

one knows what happened to her but some people are wondering if her ex- boyfriend had anything to do with it. So we are going ask her ex-boyfriend next.

[18:20:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: You had to pick a setting for a scary movie. A funeral home would make for a great place. Just think about it. All those dead bodies

they`re lying in their caskets. Room after room. It`s a little bit creepy.

But the real life story that played out at the Mission Park Funeral Chapel in San Antonio isn`t just creepy, it is downright criminal. Because as 25-

year-old Julie Mott lay in one of those caskets awaiting cremation, somebody stole her.

You heard me right. They just walked right into that funeral home, opened the casket and took Julie`s body and no one has seen her since. And that

was that in 2015.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RON SALAZAR, MOTT`S ATTORNEY: There are no written policies to tell the employees exactly what they are supposed to do. Exactly what the management

expectation is in this situation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Well, as you can as you can imagine, there was plenty of finger pointing back then like an ex-boyfriend who had been lingering nearby. But

the police never pinned the crime on him or anyone. Fast forward a few years and there is a lawsuit against the funeral home. And that funeral

home is defending itself saying it had to be that boyfriend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bill Wilburn did this. So from the start, the Mott family immediately blamed Bill Wilburn as being responsible.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Julie`s family in an attempt to find some kind of answer or closure at least is seeking a million dollars in that suit.

Dennis Foley is the news director at KTSA and he joins me from San Antonio. Dennis, she at 25 years old had an untimely death, it was cystic fibrosis.

No foul play, nothing like that involved.

But it seems as though, the family wanted her cremated and perhaps the boyfriend did not. And if I`m -- if I`m not correct there, correct me and

take the narrative from there.

DENNIS FOLEY, NEWS DIRECTOR, KTSA: Yes. So her story is interesting in that she wasn`t expected to live beyond three years old, and so to make it

to 25 was a miracle in the way for the family. And you know, she, they weren`t expecting her to be a young girl, a young woman, and young adult.

And they get to this point and her death, you know, almost two years ago. It wasn`t expected by her family as when you live with someone that you

wouldn`t expecting to live that long. You know, things like that come very suddenly.

In this case, they initially, the family initially believe that it was the boyfriend, the ex-boyfriend that had taken her or had done something to her

but then they turn their attention to the funeral home.

I`m not exactly sure, you know, where the ex-boyfriend now fits into all of this because, you know, police had talked to him and he didn`t file any

charges with him, and now the funeral home is saying hey, you know, the family should have told us that this ex-boyfriend was obsessive about their

daughter.

BANFIELD: So let me -- let me go through the timeline. The service was held for Julie at 1.30 in the afternoon. That`s when it ended, OK? From

1.30 in the afternoon to 4.30 in the afternoon, that`s closing time, Julie`s body in the casket went from a hallway into a viewing room, if I`m

not mistaken.

But it wasn`t particularly secure, as I understand. After 4.30, that funeral home is closed and Julie`s empty casket is discovered not until the

next morning. And the only reason that the boyfriend comes into the picture, you know, in earnest is because the allegations are that he was

the last one to leave that service and had been seen lingering.

Do I have those facts right, Dennis and is there something else that I`ve missed?

[18:25:03] FOLEY: So they believed, the funeral home believed that the crime happened sometime between 1.30 and 4.30. In between that time the

service had ended at 1.30. Someone had gone back to check on that they`ve made lock up the shop and have realized that the body wasn`t in the casket.

part of the hinge wasn`t on their right, the car that the casket was on wasn`t exactly in a natural position where they normally leave it. And the

ex-boyfriend was there for an extra 15 minutes or so.

So it was a pretty natural connection for at least the family and eventually the funeral home to say hey, something is not right here. You

know, this ex-boyfriend has been obsessive, I mean, to linger around a few extra minutes.

You know, one may say that`s to mourn, but you know, that could bring some suspicion. And after that point, the funeral home has no idea where the

body went, the family has no idea where the body went and police have no idea where that body went either.

BANFIELD: So mysterious. Let me bring in Julie Mott`s ex-boyfriend Bill Wilburn, he joins live now from San Antonio. Bill, I really appreciate you

doing this. This is not easy when a lot of people are pointing fingers at you to go on television and be interviewed.

The family said they think it`s you that you`re responsible, the funeral home says they think it`s you that you`re responsible for taking Julie

Mott`s body. Was it you?

BILL WILBURN, JULIE MOTT`S EX-BOYFRIEND: No, of course not. Absolutely, not. The fact that the funeral home is still hoping that I`m going to be

their scapegoat at this point is incredibly sad.

BANFIELD: So, can I ask you, were you officially cleared by the police?

WILBURN: You know, honestly I have no idea. I like to think that they are still looking into this, so they have never told me you are good to go,

Bill or anything like that.

BANFIELD: So you feel as though you are still living under the umbrella of suspicion from all parties including the police?

WILBURN: I`m currently under house arrest.

BANFIELD: Now let`s get to that. You are under house arrest, but not for this particular incident, correct?

WILBURN: Right. Correct.

BANFIELD: Is the house arrest for -- and this goes my next question, in fact. The arrest for trespassing months and months almost a year later,

right, at the funeral home.

WILBURN: Yes. The time frame is strange for which they actually issued the warrant and when they actually arrested me and said that I`m being charged

with trespassing. And they did bring me downtown and asked me for about an hour and a half all of the same exact questions and all of my answers were

the same exact answers.

The last thing the detectives told me was good, at least now we have some leverage. I have no idea to this day what they were referring to in terms

of leverage. I do know that this is a very heavily politically charged case and the owner of the funeral home is a heavy sponsor to the republican

candidacy for Texas.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: What does it have to do with politics? This just sounds like a whodunit.

WILBURN: I know. It sound very strange. The network that he`s part of are very small. He`s a big fish in a very small pond. So I don`t doubt that

this can be one of the types of situations.

BANFIELD: So back to the trespassing thing. I think, you know, I originally when I heard the story, I thought the trespassing was that same

time frame that you had been lingering and eventually somebody decided you were tresspassing. It was almost a year later. What were you doing there

almost a year later?

WILBURN: Well, allegedly a year later. Moments maybe within a few weeks afterwards, I did drive around the building and make myself seen. That was

the only time I would say that I was actually lingering.

Basically I wanted to see how they would respond. I wanted to see if somebody would come out of the building or if they would call the police.

And they came out of the building. I got into an argument with the funeral director who basically said I need to fess up. And that was that. I never

had gone back after that.

BANFIELD: So let`s go back to that because that`s a little confusing. You said allegedly. Were you or weren`t you on the property of the same funeral

home months and months, almost a year later?

WILBURN: No. I never went back on the property. There had been times that I would just drive by th funeral home.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: So you were arrested for driving by?

WILBURN: No, they were saying that I went back after being arrested. They said that I went back after that even while I was on GPS. My pretrial

officer called me and mentioned that people had been calling her and asking her if I had gone back. And I haven`t.

BANFIELD: So let me ask, when you were -- when you were arrested for trespass, where were you when they took you in?

[18:30:04] WILBURN: I was in the parking lot of my job.

BANFIELD: So they came to you and fabricated entirely that you were anywhere near that funeral home? This sounds preposterous.

WILBURN: Well, I wouldn`t say that they fabricated it. I would say that most likely Mission Park has been trying to build a case saying that I`m

obsessed, I keep going back to the funeral --

BANFIELD: Were you or weren`t you there? It`s such a simple question. Were you there?

WILBURN: Not at all. Not months afterwards. I would never go --

BANFIELD: So they fabricated that you were there?

WILBURN: Absolutely, yes. I mean, as soon as I was given that trespassing order, I never ever went back on to the property.

BANFIELD: So we are talking about two different visits after this young woman`s body disappeared, is that right?

WILBURN: Yes, that`s correct. They have alleged that I have gone back there multiple times, not just twice.

BANFIELD: OK. It`s awfully confusing, but it`s just a little odd. Why would you ever go back there at all after the service?

WILBURN: It`s an odd thing to explain. I have an uncle that was hit by a drunk driver when I was a kid and he drove by that guy`s house a bunch of

times. And, you know, it`s not something that I can explain. In fact, knowing that somebody is going die, that you know and you care about, you

can`t ever prepare for something like that.

BANFIELD: Can I ask you this, Bill? Why were you the last person to leave the service and where did you go once the funeral home closed?

WILBURN: I hadn`t seen her for two years. I think that she really didn`t want me to see her once she had gotten on oxygen. And me and her did really

have a special relationship. I know that they tried to pin me as the obsessed person, but it wasn`t just me making phone calls.

In the last two weeks, I`m very blessed to say that we had conversations leading up to the day before she passed and when she had called me and told

me that she was happy to be in her car and driving after going to the dentist and --

BANFIELD: That`s all interesting, but I did ask, why were you the last to leave the service and where did you go once you did?

WILBURN: After the service, I went to my grandmother`s house. I found out that she had a tumor maybe a week before the funeral and I thought that

would be the best and most ideal thing. I thought that we wouldn`t even talk about the funeral. I went to my grandmother`s house and we sat and

talked about two hours about it.

BANFIELD: And why were you the last to leave?

WILBURN: Well, I really cared about her and I just wanted to -- I literally just sat there and prayed for probably about 10 minutes and I

left and that was it. I just wanted that one moment. I was going to marry her. She was going to be my wife basically and we never get to that point.

I feel like I made the decision for her to go back home and stay with her family and in the last few phone calls, she forgave me for a lot of stuff,

and we did have a really special relationship.

BANFIELD: Bill, I appreciate you. It`s all very confusing. I think it`s still more questions than answer, but I do appreciate you being brave

enough and taking the time to come on TV to talk about it. Thank you.

WILBURN: Thank you.

BANFIELD: A Canadian billionaire and his billionaire wife found dead in their mansion, hanging, hanging by their indoor pool. And police say it was

a double murder, but they didn`t say that for a real long time. So what changed?

[18:35:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Barry and Honey Sherman had it all. Billions of dollars. A social calendar on overdrive. In fact, so much money in time, they gave

millions away to charity. The kids were grown and it seems that though Barry and Honey were living a dream in a mega-mansion with an indoor

swimming pool.

So imagine the shock to their kids when police told them both of their parents were dead, their bodies found hanging near that swimming pool. And

it wasn`t like they were murdered. Rumors began to swirl. Was it a murder- suicide?

But now, six weeks later, things have changed. Thanks to some good old- fashioned detective work. And police say they are now investigating the case indeed as a double murder.

(START VIDEO CLIP)

SUSAN GOMES, DETECTIVE SERGEANT, TORONTO POLICE HOMICIDE DEPARTMENT: There are no signs of forced entry on all access points to the home. Honey and

Barry Sherman were found deceased in the lower level pool area, hanging by belts from a pool side railing in a semi-seated position on the pool deck.

They were wearing their clothing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Not only that. Investigators say the Shermans` killings were not random.

(START VIDEO CLIP)

GOMES: We believe now through the six weeks of work review, we have sufficient

[18:40:00] evidence to describe this as a double homicide investigation. That both Honey and Barry Sherman were in fact targeted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: And that`s about all that detective lady was prepared to say. Sue Ann Levy is a reporter with the Toronto Sun, and she joins me now live.

Sue Ann, this is going to be a difficult interview because while you are a reporter on the story, as I understand it, you also know this couple

personally. How is that?

SUE ANN LEVY, REPORTER, TORONTO SUN: I knew them actually quite well. I was loosely associated with them. They were very, very close friends of my

aunt and late uncle. And I have to say my aunt was absolutely devastated the day they found the bodies.

As well, they were very, very well-known in the Jewish community here in Toronto. Well known for their philanthropic efforts. They were known as the

Jewish power couple. There wasn`t an event or I guess a fund-raising, I guess --

BANFIELD: Gala. I bet they were everywhere.

LEVY: Yes, gala. They were everywhere. There wasn`t a fund-raising event or a commitment that they didn`t get themselves involved in. In fact, I had

seen Honey Sherman three weeks before at an event.

BANFIELD: Can I ask you? The story just started so strangely. The news broke that this billionaire couple was found dead, hanging in their indoor

swimming pool, and that it looked like it might be a murder-suicide.

When I say that, that was only through rumor and leaks. The police never said that. Bu why -- was it a leak? Was it a police leak that this was a

murder-suicide? And why on earth did the story sort of take that tact at the beginning?

LEVY: Well, it was a police leak. Definitely it was a police leak. In fact, it was leaked to our paper. You know, I personally having known them

and known that they had everything to live for didn`t think it was.

I was on the story the second day after the bodies were found. And I right away felt that it was a contract hit. There was no reason for them to want

to kill each other and it made no sense. Barry Sherman was -- I`m sorry.

BANFIELD: The thing that really makes no sense to me is the scene. And I got the picture. Let`s put that picture back up of the pool. The indoor

swimming pool. The house is just beautiful. This is the part of the indoor part of the house, the swimming pool.

But the description -- and I`m just going to read if I can from your paper. Actually I think this one is from the Toronto Star. I want to read this

quote on what the description is to the bodies in this -- and I want to keep the photo up so that you can envision this.

Can I drop the banner for a minute so everyone can see it? Yes, thank you. All right. So this is what this quote says. The bodies were facing away

from the pool with men`s leather belts around their necks. They were looped or tied around a low railing in the room. The couple was not hanging.

The report also said they were found in winter coats, pulled down over their shoulders, which may have limited their arm movement. Sue Ann, I`m

trying to picture that with the scene of the crime. Did they -- were they hanging from these pool railings?

And if so, how on earth were they murdered that way because they were seated as well as hanging. Can you describe this and explain it?

LEVY: Yes. They were tied to the railings with the belts. Their hands were behind their back. And they were strangled. It was believed that they were

strangled to death first with the belts and then tied to the railings.

The contract hit as I believe it was, was very professionally done to make it look like a murder-suicide. Unfortunately, the police didn`t wait for

the autopsy results to come out on Sunday night, two days after the bodies were found, to really determine how they were killed or how they were

murdered.

BANFIELD: And Sue Anne, to be real clear, they had ligature marks around their wrists.

LEVY: Yes.

BANFIELD: However, their wrists were -- both as I understand it. They had ligature marks around wrists so the wrists have been tied. But then when

they were found, those wrists were not tied. Meaning, perhaps that`s how they were killed, but whomever was responsible for the killing untied the

hands to make it look like a murder-suicide, is that correct?

LEVY: Yes. I actually believe that they were -- the killers awaited them when they came home on Wednesday night and that`s why they were found in

their winter coats --

BANFIELD: Surprised them.

LEVY: -- and surprised them, yes.

BANFIELD: Well, there are so many more questions. Don`t go anywhere. I still have a lot to ask. A lot of it has to do with his business was all

about and all those billions of dollars. And of course, whenever you are in a big business, maybe there are some issues. In turns out with this guy, a

lot of issues.

Straight ahead, we are going to get down to what is next in the investigation as well as who might have been an enemy of this couple.

[18:45:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: A billionaire power couple found dead in their home and at first, investigators believe Barry and Honey Sherman died of some sort of

murder-suicide.

(START VIDEO CLIP)

MURRAY RUBIN, FRIEND OF BARRY SHERMAN: The idea that he killed her

[18:50:00] or she killed him and committed suicide is about as logical as my being an astronaut and sent to the moon for NASA.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Now, six weeks later, they are calling it not a murder-suicide, a double homicide. They say the Shermans were targeted. But would anybody

want to kill this couple known for donating millions to charity?

Could their murders be linked to Barry`s company? The company he founded. Apotex. It brings in more than a billion dollars a year, selling generic

drugs and it`s the business that left Barry with a lot of lawsuits and a lot of enemies.

With me now, private investigator and former NYPD officer, Bill Stanton. Bill, the kids hired private investigators when they started to get

frustrated and pushed back against the police, leaking this notion that it was a murder-suicide.

I have a question for you about the enemy list. When you got a business like that and he is mired in so many lawsuits, isn`t that really where you

first start to look? Would the police look there first?

BILL STANTON, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR, FORMER NYPD OFFICER (via telephone): Well, yes and no. You look from without, meaning what you just said,

possible competitors, possible people within the company. And from within, possibly family. Did the decedents have lovers? Did he have a lover? Did

she have a lover? You look at all of the above. Any possible way for a motive. That`s what you want to look at.

BANFIELD: OK. So then there is also the style. This horrendous scene, this murder scene of them strapped by their necks with men`s belts to the low

railing right by the pool in a seated position that looks like they were put there. Does that sort of help you in the investigation as well?

STANTON (via telephone): Well, yes. It`s a tremendous jump of point because it tells me this was thought out. This was not random. In my mind`s

eye, unless we find something on the electronic footprint, it definitely wasn`t the male, wasn`t Barry to the female. This was done from outside.

And it was thought out and it was methodical and it was done in a way to potentially throw people off. But as the person previously said to think,

unless there was extenuating circumstances where there was an electronic suicide note or there were bouts of depression or there was a loved one

lost, no, this was an outside influence. Someone murdered these two in my opinion.

BANFIELD: So let me bring in Joey Jackson here. Something else as sort of a monkey wrench has been thrown into this thing with a cousin, a cousin of

Barry Sherman. No love lost by the way between this cousin and Barry.

JOEY JACKSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, CNN AND HLN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.

BANFIELD: Lots of litigation, bad business blood between them, and out he comes to the Daily Mail, Kerry Winter, saying that Barry Sherman had twice

approached him to kill Honey for him, that he want to -- I want you to whack my wife, Kerry Winter said. He also says, my gut tells me Barry

killed Honey. And all I can say is, wouldn`t that be sort of an obvious for the police to start looking at the cousin?

JACKSON: A hundred percent. And so think about the logic of that. I am -- you know, all the time, we are fighting, every other day. There is

aggression. There is litigation. But I`m going to come to you and say, because you are such a good friend of mine, who I fought with every day, I

want you to be the killer.

BANFIELD: I trust you.

JACKSON: Doesn`t make sense. I think this turns on two things, Ashleigh. One is forensics and the other is motivation, right? In the event that you

are going to die, is this going to be, you know, you want to kill yourself, so what issue would cause you to do that?

Was there something in Denmark that was rotten where we are having issues and problems, that would be a footprint out there, text messages out there,

something and e-mails together that are out there that we know, right?

BANFIELD: By the way, six weeks? Six weeks?

JACKSON: Of investigation.

BANFIELD: To determine that this is not a murder-suicide. That`s crazy.

JACKSON: That is beyond crazy and so therefore, I think, and I`m glad they took that six weeks, because at the end of the day, that gives you the

information to know that it`s not a murder-suicide, it is a homicide murder. Hopefully, we will get to the bottom of it.

BANFIELD: Day two to this phase because this story is crazy. It`s not going away. Joey, thank you for that. Sue Ann Levy, thank you. Bill

Stanton, thank you as well.

Chicago`s serial stow away, best known for sneaking past security and right on to airplanes and overseas, made a couple of scheduled appearances today,

and no, we are not repeating last week`s story. The allegations are she had done it yet again.

[18:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Not one more thing for you tonight, actually we have two more things for you tonight. Marilyn Hartman, the so-called serial stowaway, she

has been busted at least a dozen times for breaching airport security and she was in court twice today for her latest adventures.

First up, she had to answer charges relating to her free flight to London just nine days ago. According to CNN affiliate WGN, Hartman seemed a bit

agitated, blurting out her answers to the judge before her public defender could do the answering for her.

And then a little later on, she was in a different courtroom before a different judge, answering trespass charges for violating an order to stay

away from an airport which stemmed from that incident nine days prior. Stay away from Chicago (INAUDIBLE).

[19:00:00] Both of the judges agreed today that Hartman needs mental health exams to determine if she is fit to stand trial. Deja vu all over again in

one week.

Next hour of CRIME AND JUSTICE starts right now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BANFIELD (voice-over): Tragic accident or murder?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m yanking the head of the driver and the driver was being pulled to the side.

BANFIELD: A beautiful twin accused of killing her sister by driving off a 200 foot drive.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The defendant intentionally or knowingly drove off the cliff thereby causing the death of her sister.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: New witnesses on the stand.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You saw the passenger fighting with the driver?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

BANFIELD: And new accusations she dressed in her sister`s clothes and cuddled up to her sister`s boyfriend just days after the crash.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When the car went left over the cliff, the passenger was still pulling the driver`s hair?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

BANFIELD: A beautiful woman dies too soon.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is not an easy thing to talk about.

BANFIELD: But what happened next, no one saw coming.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m not believing this is happening.

BANFIELD: Her body disappears right out of her casket. Police question the boyfriend seen near the funeral home. But two years later, still no

body and still no answers.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So that we could have some closure to our grief.

BANFIELD: A billionaire couple found hanging near their indoor pool.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did not observe signs of forced entry.

BANFIELD: What happened inside that sprawling mansion?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We have sufficient evidence to describe this as a double homicide investigation.

BANFIELD: Were the belts tied around their necks a key to solving this crime?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They were wearing their clothing.

BANFIELD: The question now, why were Barry and Honey targets?

She has been called the serial stow away.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Obviously they will be able to watch for me.

BANFIELD: Arrested more than a dozen times for sneaking on to planes all across the country. And you guessed it, cops say she has done it again,

twice in just 10 days. Marilyn Hartman is you busted.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don`t think jail is an appropriate place for Ms. Hartman.

BANFIELD: But how else can they stop Marilyn Hartman from doing it again?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BANFIELD: Good evening, everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield. And this is the second hour of CRIME AND JUSTICE.

It takes a lot of flexibility to be a yoga teacher and it take a ton of strength and skill to be a good one. So double that and you have the

Duvall sisters. Identical twin who made the Florida teaching a special class to people with lots of money.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You are going to swat and surrender at the same time.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We love the energy. West Palm Beach is the heartbeat in this entire district. And twin power yoga, out tagline is power the

body and power the soul. That`s exactly what you get in out hot tower yoga discipline.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: But it seems like things went south in a hurry when the twins packed up and moved to Hawaii. It would be just months before both of them

would go hurdling off a jagged cliff in a white SUV and only one of them would emerge a survivor.

That one, Alexandria, is now charged with the other twin`s murder. Before that car went off the road, witnesses heard yelling and arguing and even

saw hair pulling. But mixed in with all that forensic and expert evidence is the victim`s boyfriend. And the story he tells about the surviving

sister the day after the crash, dressing up in her sister`s clothes and snuggling up to her sister`s boyfriend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FEDERICO BAILEY, BOYFRIEND OF VICTIM: I gave her a shower. I washed her hair and we sat down after that. She put on all Anastasia`s clothes She

put on a dress by Anastasia and started dressing like her and came down and sat beside me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you question her about wearing Anna`s clothes?

BAILEY: No. I saw her in the dress. When I saw her in Ananastasia`s dress, it was disturbing because she had worn that dress a few nights

before with me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: With me now, Jesse Weber. He is a lawyer. He is also a host of Law And Crime Network and he is covering this case, gavel to gavel.

You know, when we started talking about this case last night, I didn`t think you would be back so soon. I didn`t think there would be this

incredible wrench drawn in to his file. That dressing up in her dead sister`s clothes the next day and snuggling up to the dead sister`s

boyfriend. That must have been a bombshell in the courtroom.

[19:05:03] JESSE WEBER, ATTORNEY AND HOST, LAW AND CRIME NETWORK: Yes, that`s one way of putting it. I mean, it really doesn`t bode very well for

Alexandria because the question becomes if she really had nothing to do with this and she really wasn`t trying to kill her sister, why would you

dress up in her clothes and why would you flirt with her boyfriend? If you take that way.

Now if I was the defense attorney, I would say, well, you are looking at this in the complete wrong way. Everybody handles grief in the different

way. This boyfriend, Federico, he looked at it the complete wrong was. She just needed condolences. She just needed somebody to help her through

this.

Now having said that, the timing of that is bizarre because let`s not forget, she also tried to book a flight to the mainland at the same time.

It gets a little suspicious looking.

But Ashleigh, we talked about this last night. We are talking about reasonable doubt here. And the problem for the state is they have an

uphill case because there is so much shown here, no one knows what exactly happened in that car. How can you definitively say that she drove that car

because she was intending to kill her sister? If there was a fight going on and everybody keep saying there was a fight, and there was an expert put

on the stand right now by the defense, put on today, that said that that car turned left not because she intentionally moved the wheel, but it hit

the dirt mound.

BANFIELD: I`m going to get to all that was in a minute. And so, our conversation last was almost exclusively about how the heck does anyone

survive this, a 200 foot drop. And the survivor was not on the passenger side. That was the survivor was on the driver`s side which was even more

strange when you saw the pictures.

But back to Federico Bailey, that boyfriend, for a minute. Because I kind of need to get in his head to sort of sort out whether this is her grieving

by cuddling up to him, you know. I can see that. Maybe twins share clothes, but boy oh, boy did he have a longer story to tell them that.

Have a listen as Federico Bailey talks about all of that flirting.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did Alexandra behaved in an unusual way to you?

BAILEY: Well, she began, you know, just like cuddling up on me, you know. Again, it seemed like she was flirting with me. She came and sat down

really close and she laid her hand on my shoulder. Then she -- she wanted to help her untangle her hair like I said. I got her hair untangled and

she wanted me to wash her hair and I thought we were going to like to the sink, the kitchen sink or something. We wash her hair over the sink and

she took me to the shower Anastasia`s bedroom where Anastasia and I would shower. That was a little bit uncomfortable. At one point, she was ready

to take off all her clothes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: OK. That`s just weird. She wanted him to wash her hair and actually get in the shower with him?

WEBER: It is bizarre because anybody who has been studying this case knows that there has been some sort of jealously in this relationship between the

sisters. So that kind of adds to that.

But that`s not even the weirdest part about it. The fact is this crash just happened and he asked her what happened and she was completely evasive

about what happened.

BANFIELD: She wouldn`t tell him.

WEBER: She wouldn`t give him any answers about the crash. Now, you can say that`s trauma, but she is on trial for second-degree murder. There was

a question about if she is hiding something. Is there is something more nefarious here?

BANFIELD: And it sort of odd because this, you know, white SUV ended up in that position and this incredible rescue happened where Alexandria was

holed up in a stretcher by that court, that boyfriend was actually stuck out at the campsite sight. They would often camping together. And he kept

wondering where are they? They literally ditched me here. He had to like hitch hike. And he thought was going to be basically abandon at this

campsite, right. That`s why he needed these questions answered. He had no idea what was going on.

WEBER: Yes. He was thought it was going to be a time with him and his girlfriend. And he said Alex wanted to tag along and then he was going to

the bathroom when they jumped in the car and drove away.

BANFIELD: So there is all that screaming and all that crazy behavior. And Federico, I wanted to play you another moment of that testimony because he

talked about how at that campsite, Alexandria, there were so much fighting, Alexandria said I`m going to get you in the car and get you the hell out of

here and the comment that came from the now dead twin sister is sort of bone chilling. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BAILEY Alexandria said she was taking us home and Anastasia responded and sad no, you are not driving us anywhere. I am not going to have you drive

me off the side of the road.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection. Hearsay.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That`s so telling. I`m not going to have you drive me off the road and literally that`s what happened. She was driven off the

road.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That last statement is stricken.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: I mean that is so telling. I`m not going to have you drive me home and drive me off the road. And literally that`s what happened. Just

driven off the road.

[19:10:01] WEBER: Extremely ominous and sad that that`s what happened. And either she was commenting on the fact that she was a bad driver or

commenting on the fact that they were having a fight and she was nervous about getting in the car. We will never know. Obviously, it was stricken

from the record because it is hearsay. But it`s good for us to note that and try to understand what was going on between these two women when they

got in the car.

BANFIELD: And look. All of our minds might be taken away and if we were sitting in a jury box, that would be really important how we would be

interpreting all of this. But there is no one sitting in the jury box. This is a bench trial. It is all a performance for the judge. Which by

the way, might be why two days of testimony and that`s all the prosecution has got. That`s all they are given this judge. Nothing else.

WEBER: Yes. That bench trial and think it`s a smart move by the defense, they maybe felt that a jury wouldn`t be so sympathetic to her and he talked

about that standard reasonable doubt, who would know that better than a judge? A judge would be able to determine that there is sufficient

reasonable doubt to say that she may not be convicted for second-degree murder.

BANFIELD: Le me bring in Joey Jackson right now because as a defense attorney, I`m sure that you would have a hay day with all of this, a bench

trial. Two days of testimony and not a whole lot of goods except for the sexy stuff that the boyfriend was talking about. And then there is this,

this sort of shock moment. One of the witness, I think his names is Hank Kaupe. I`m not sure if I`m pronouncing it right, but it is Hank Kaupe. He

described what the aftermath of this accident was. And there is a reason I`m playing this for you. Have a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HANK KAUPE, WITNESS: I was kind of worried when I was going close to the vehicle because all the fluid and all of the gas and the water, it was

splashing up on the cliff. Like the car didn`t blow up. She was running when I got there. She was very shock I think. (INAUDIBLE), did tried to

speak to her as help is on the way and see if anybody else was in the vehicle. She was shock, speak to me but I could hear (INAUDIBLE) slamming

against the rocks and the car.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: So that is a guy who came upon the scene, Joey, and describes in detail that aftermath. None of that emotion matters to a judge. He just

wants the facts. He wants to know exactly what was happening beforehand. And the first judge who looked at this tossed it out and said not even

probable cause.

Now we are before another judge. Can you just give me a feel for the inside baseball of the court system where one judge does something and

another has to follow suit? Do they looked to that for precedent? Do they behave in the same way?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Not really. Judges, you know, look. Judges try to give a fair airing of whatever facts they had before them.

But you know, it`s not lost upon a defense attorney that another judge heard this case and drew it out finding no probable cause. And if you look

at why a judge might have done that, Ashleigh. This is called an intentional killing, but it could very well have been an accident. And

this boyfriend to me is delusional. So she killed her sister because she was jealous and wanted to be with you? Are you serious would be my

suggestion to the judge.

And so the judge is going to look at the cold hard facts. And at the end of the day, say listen, did she really ever -- remember she is imperiling

herself by going off a cliff. So I`m going to kill myself but I`m not. I`m going live so I can be with your boyfriend. That I know I`m going to

live because I`m going off a 200-foot cliff.

It`s an accident, ladies and gentlemen. But there is no ladies and gentlemen. It`s just a judge. And a judge wouldn`t know that. And

therefore, you don`t take the risk with the jury was the calculation of the defense in this case. Although, I`m always willing to leave a case to one

person`s judgment. But in this case, I think it may work because that other judge tossed it.

BANFIELD: I have to be honest. I`m so skeptical of this because I heard no evidence of until now of any desire to kill yourself. And that`s

effectively what she would be doing by taking that left hand turn and going off a 200-foot cliff.

Let me bring in former traffic homicide investigator because that`s what we need, a former traffic homicide investigator, Corporal Dwaine Parker is

with me now.

You will have the answers to the technical of all of this. I don`t know corporal Parker if you can get inside a twin`s brain as she is flying off a

cliff, Thelma and Louise style. But the black box of this car, and they had such thing at this time at this day and age, we got something called

the air bag control module of this 2016 fort explorer, had her speeding up before going off the cliff, no brakes at all. And when that accelerator

was depressed, it was depressed to the floor meaning hell`s bells were going faster. But can you give me a good defense for that? Can you tell

me if two women are fighting in a car, how that might happen?

CPL. DWAINE PARKER, FORMER TRAFFIC HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR (on the pone): Well, if the two women are fighting, obviously, the sister in the passenger

seat, she was the aggressor and she is pulling the hair by the witness statements of the driver. And if she is pulling her out at the driver`s

compartment, that is going to stretch her out. The driver is naturally is going to hold on to steering wheel to gain some sort of leverage. And I

believe that`s where the turn came in. And if she has her leg extended to gain more leverage, her leg can extend and touch the gas accelerator and

then pushing it to the floor and not even realizing that she is doing that.

BANFIELD: So, I mean, you will just have to just sort of pretend in your chairs at home that you are in the driver`s seat. Put your left foot on

the gas and then imagine your passenger is yanking you towards her. What would you do? What would your foot do? What would your hand on the

steering wheel do?

Real quickly, Jesse, you have ten seconds. Defense still has a lot to present.

[19:15:17] WEBER: They do. But honestly, I don`t think they have to do much. Again, it`s the uphill battle for the state. And as Joey said, they

are going to have to show a lot. I don`t think they have done so far to show that this wasn`t an accident. It could very well have been an

accident.

BANFIELD: Yes. Everybody`s behavior is questionable. But don`t ever imagine what it`s like to be in the shoes of this defendant.

Gentlemen, thank you. Jesse and Joey and corporal Parker as well.

Mystery in Texas after a young woman`s body literally disappears from the funeral home from her casket and she has never seen again. Nobody knows

what happened? But some people are wondering if her ex-boyfriend had anything to do with it. So we are just going to go right ahead and ask him

about that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:20:37] BANFIELD: If you had to pick a setting for a scary movie, a funeral home would make for a great place. Just think about it. All those

dead bodies, they are lying in their caskets. Room after room. It is just a little bit creepy.

But the real life story that played out at Mission Park Funeral Chapel in San Antonio is not just creepy, it is downright criminal. Because as 25-

year-old Julie Mott lay in one of those caskets awaiting cremation, somebody stole her. You heard me right. They just walked right into that

funeral home, opened the casket and took Julie`s body. And no one has seen her since. And that was back in 2015.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RON SALAZAR, MOTT`S ATTORNEY: There are no written policies to tell the employees exactly what they are supposed to do. Exactly what the

management expectation is in this situation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Well, as you can imagine, there was plenty of finger pointing back then like an ex-boyfriend who had been lingering nearby. But the

police never pinned the crime on him or anyone. Fast forward few years and there is a lawsuit against the funeral home. And that funeral home is

defending itself saying it had to be the boyfriend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bill Wilburn did this.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So from the start the Mott family immediately blamed Bill Wilburn as being responsible.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Julie`s family in an attempt to find some kind of answer or closure at least is seeking a million dollars in that suit.

Dennis Foley is the news director t KTSA and he joins me from San Antonio.

Dennis, she at 25 years old, had an untimely death. It was cystic fibrosis. No foul play. Nothing like that involved. But it seems as

though, the family wanted her cremated and perhaps the boyfriend did not. And if I`m not correct there, correct me and take the narrative from there.

DENNIS FOLEY, NEWS DIRECTOR, KTSA (on the phone): Yes. So her story is interesting in that she was not expected to live beyond three years old.

And so to make it to 25 was almost a miracle for the family. And you know, she -- they were expecting her to be a young girl, a young woman, a young

adult. And they get to this point and her death, you know, almost two years ago wasn`t expected by her family when you live with someone you

weren`t expecting to live that long. You know, things like that come very suddenly. And in this case they initially, the family initially believed

it was the boyfriend, the ex-boyfriend that had taken her or had done something to her. But then they turned their attention to the funeral

home.

I`m not exactly sure, you know, where the ex-boyfriend now fits into all of this because, you know, police had talked to him, didn`t file any changes

with him and now the funeral home is saying hey, you know, the family should have told us that this ex-boyfriend was obsessive about their

daughter.

BANFIELD: So let me go through the timeline. The service was held for Julie at 1:30 in the afternoon. That`s when it ended, OK. From 1:30 in

the afternoon to 4:30 in the afternoon, that`s closing time, Julie`s body in the casket went from a hallway into a viewing room, if I`m not mistaken.

But it wasn`t particularly secure as I understand it.

After 4:30 that funeral home is closed and Julie`s empty casket is discovered not until the next morning. And the only reason the boyfriend

comes into the picture, you know, in earnest is because the allegations is that he was the last one to leave that service and had been seen lingering.

Do I have those facts right, Dennis? And is there something else that I have missed?

FOLEY: So they believe, the (INAUDIBLE) believe that the crime happened sometime between 1:30 and 4:30. In between that time, the service ended at

1:30. And someone had gone back to check on or that it was locking up the shop and had realized that the body was not in the casket. From the hinge

was not on there right and the cart that the casket was on was not exactly in a natural position where they would normally leave it. And the ex-

boyfriend was there for an extra 15 minutes or so. So it was a pretty natural connection for at least the family and the eventually funeral home

to say, hey, something is not right here, you know. This ex-boyfriend has been obsessive, I mean, to linger around a few extra minutes, you know.

One, they say it`s to mourn, but, you know, that could bring some suspicion. And after that point, if your home has no idea where the body

went, the family has no idea where the body went and police have no idea where that body went either.

[19:25:40] BANFIELD: So mysterious.

Let me bring in Julie Mott`s ex-boyfriend, Bill Wilburn. He joins me live now from the San Antonio.

Bill, I really appreciate you doing this. This is not easy when a lot of people are pointing fingers at you to go on television and be interviewed.

The family said they think it`s you. That you are responsible. The funeral home said they think it`s you, that you are responsible for taking

Julie Mott`s body. Was it you?

BILL WILBURN, EX-BOYFRIEND OF JULIE MOTT: No. Of course not. Absolutely not. The fact that the funeral home is still hoping that I`m going to be

their scapegoat at this point is incredibly sad.

BANFIELD: So can I ask you, were you officially cleared by the police?

WILBURN: You know, honestly I have no idea. I like think that they are still looking into this. So they, you know, they have never told me you

are good to go, Bill, or anything like that.

BANFIELD: So you feel as though you are still living under the umbrella of suspicion from all parties including the police.

WILBURN: I`m currently under house arrest.

BANFIELD: Yes. Let`s get to that. You are under house arrest, but not for this particular incident, correct?

WILBURN: Right, correct.

BANFIELD: Is the house arrest and this goes to my next question, in fact, the arrest for trespassing months and months, almost a year later, right,

at the funeral home.

WILBURN: Yes, the time frame is strange for which they actually issued the warrant and when they actually arrested me and said that I`m being charged

with trespassing. And they did bring me downtown and asked me for about an hour and a half all of the same exact questions and all of my answers are

the same exact answers. And the last thing the detectives told were good, at least now we have some leverage.

I have no idea until this day what they were referring to in terms of leverage. I do know that this is a very heavily politically charged case.

And the owner of the Mission Park Funeral Homes is a heavy sponsor to the Republican candidacy for Texas.

BANFIELD: What are does it have to do with politics? This just sounds like a who done it?

WILBURN: I know. It sounds very strange. The networks that he is a part of our very small. He`s a big fish in a very small pond. So I don`t doubt

that this can be one of those types of situations.

So back to the trespassing thing, I think, you know, I originally, when I heard the story, I thought the trespassing was that same time frame thaw

had been lingering and eventually somebody, you know, decided you were trespassing. It was almost a year later. What were you doing there almost

a year later?

WILBURN: Allegedly a year later. Moments maybe within a few weeks afterwards. I did drive around the building and make myself seen. That`s

the only time I would say that I was actually lingering. And basically, I wanted to see how they would respond. I wanted to see if somebody would

come out of the building or if they would call police. And they came out of the building. I got into an argument with the funeral director who

basically said I need to fess up. And that was that. You know, I left and I never had gone back there after that.

BANFIELD: But let`s go back to that. That`s a little confusing. You said allegedly. Were you or weren`t you on the property of the same funeral

home months and months, almost a year later?

WILBURN: No. I never went back on to the property. There had been times that I would just drive by the funeral home.

BANFIELD: So you were arrested for driving by?

WILBURN: No. They were saying that I went back after being arrested. They said I went back after that even while I was on GPS. My pretrial

officer called me and mentioned that people had been calling her and asking her if I have gone back.

BANFIELD: So let me ask you. When you were arrested for trespassing, where were you when they took you in?

WILBURN: I was in the parking lot of my job.

BANFIELD: So they came to you and fabricated entirely that you were anywhere near that funeral home? This sounds preposterous.

WILBURN: Well, I wouldn`t say they fabricated it. I would say that most likely Mansion Park has been trying to build a case saying that I`m

obsessed and I keep going back to the funeral home.

[19:30:04] BANFIELD: Were you or weren`t you there? It`s such a simple question. Were you there?

WILBURN: Not at all. Not months afterwards. I would never go on the --

BANFIELD: So, they fabricated that you were there?

WILBURN: Absolutely, yes. I mean, as soon as I was given that trespassing order, I never ever went back onto the property.

BANFIELD: So, we`re talking about two different visits after this young woman`s body disappeared. Is that right?

WILBURN: Yes, that`s correct. They`ve alleged that I`ve gone back there multiple times, not just twice, you know?

BANFIELD: And -- OK. It`s awfully confusing, but it`s just a little odd. Why would you ever go back there at all after the service?

WILBURN: It`s an odd thing to explain. I have an uncle that was hit by a drunk driver when I was a kid and he drove by that guy`s house a bunch of

times. And, you know, it`s not something I can explain. And in fact, knowing that somebody is going to die that you know and you care about, you

can`t ever prepare for something like that.

BANFIELD: Can I ask you this, though?

WILBURN: Yes.

BANFIELD: Why were you the last person to leave the service and where did you go once the funeral home closed?

WILBURN: I hadn`t seen her for two years. I think that she really didn`t want me to see her once she had gotten on oxygen, and me and her did really

have a special relationship. I know that they tried to pin me as the obsessed person, but it wasn`t just me making phone calls. In the last two

weeks, I`m very blessed to say that we had had conversations leading up to the day before that she passed in which she had called me and told me that

she was happy to be in her car and driving after going to the dentist. And going to be (INAUDIBLE)

BANFIELD: That`s all -- that`s all -- that`s all interesting, but I did ask why were you the last to leave the service and where did you go once

you did?

WILBURN: After the service, I went to my grandmother`s house. I found out that she had a tumor maybe a week before the funeral and I thought that`d

be the best and most ideal thing. I thought that we wouldn`t even talk about the funeral, but I went to my grandmother`s house and we sat and

talked for about two hours about it many times.

BANFIELD: And why were you the last to leave?

WILBURN: Well, I really cared about her and I just wanted to -- I literally just sat there and prayed for probably about 10 minutes and I

left and that was it. I just wanted that one moment. I was going to marry her. She was going to be my wife, basically, and we never got to that

point. And I feel like I made the decision for her to go back home and stay with her family. And in the last few phone calls she forgave me for a

lot of stuff and we did have a really special relationship.

BANFIELD: Bill, I appreciate you -- it`s all very confusing. I think it`s still more questions than answers, but I do appreciate you being brave

enough and taking the time to come on T.V. to talk about it. Thank you.

WILBURN: Thank you.

BANFIELD: A Canadian billionaire and his billionaire wife found dead in their mansion hanging by their indoor pool. And police say it was a double

murder, but they didn`t say that for a real long time. So, what changed?

[19:35:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Barry and Honey Sherman had it all, billions of dollars. A social calendar on overdrive. In fact, so much money and time, they gave

millions away to charity. The kids were grown and it seemed as tough Barry and Honey were living the dream in a mega mansion with an indoor swimming

pool. So, imagine the shock to their kids when police told them both of their parents were dead. Their bodies found hanging near that swimming

pool. And it wasn`t like they were murdered. Rumors began to swirl. Was it a murder-suicide? But now, six weeks later, things have changed thanks

to some good old-fashioned detective work. And police say they`re now investigating the case indeed as a double murder.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DETECTIVE SERGEANT SUSAN GOMES, TORONTO POLICE HOMICIDE DEPARTMENT: There are no signs of forced entry on all access points to the home. Honey and

Barry Sherman were found deceased in the lower level pool area hanging by belts from a pool side railing in a semi-seated position on the pool deck.

They were wearing their clothing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Not only that, investigators say the Shermans`s killings were not random.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOMES: We believe now through the six weeks of work review, we have sufficient evidence to describe this as a double homicide investigation.

And that both Honey and Barry Sherman were in fact targeted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: And that`s about all that detective lady was prepared to say. But Sue-Ann Levy is a reporter with the Toronto Sun and she joins me now

live. Sue-Ann, all right, this is going to be a difficult interview because while you are a reporter on the story, as I understand it, you also

know this couple personally. How is that?

[19:40:08] SUE-ANN LEVY, REPORTER, TORONTO SUN: I knew them actually quite well. I was a -- loosely associated with them, they were very, very close

friends of my aunt and late uncle. And I have to say my aunt was absolutely devastated the day they found the bodies. And as well, they

were very, very well-known in the Jewish community here in Toronto, and well-known for their philanthropic efforts. There wasn`t -- there were --

there were known as the Jewish power couple. And there wasn`t an event or a, I guess, a fund-raising, I guess, commitment that they --

BANFIELD: Gala. I bet they were everywhere.

LEVY: Yes, gala. Yes, they were everywhere. There wasn`t a fund-raising event or commitment that they didn`t get themselves involved in. And in

fact, I had seen Honey Sherman three weeks before at an event.

BANFIELD: Can I ask you, this story just started so strangely. The news broke that this billionaire couple was found dead, hanging in their indoor

swimming pool and that it looked like it might be a murder-suicide. And when I say that, that was only through rumor and leaks. The police never

said that, but why -- was it a leak, was it a police leak that this was a murder-suicide? And why on earth did the story sort of take that act at

the beginning?

LEVY: Well, it was a police leak. Definitely was a police leak. In fact, it was leaked to our paper. And, you know, I personally know -- having

known them and known they`re -- that they had everything to live for, didn`t think it was. I was on the story the second day after the bodies

were found. And I, right away, felt that it was a contract hit. There was no reason for them to want to kill each other and it made no sense. Barry

Sherman was -- I`m sorry.

BANFIELD: So, can I -- the thing that really makes no sense to me is the scene. And I thought the picture -- you know, let`s put that picture back

up of the pool, the indoor swimming pool. The house is just beautiful. This is the -- part of the indoor part of the house, the swimming pool.

But the description -- and I`m just going to read if I can from your paper. Actually, I think this one is from the Toronto Star. I want to read this

quote on what the description is of the bodies in this -- and I want to keep the photo up so that you can envision this. Can I drop the banner for

a minute so that they -- everyone can see. Yes, thank you. All right.

So, this is what this quote says, "The bodies were facing away from the pool with men`s leather belts around their necks. They were either looped

or tied around a low railing in the room. The couple was not hanging. Report also said they were found in winter coats pulled down over their

shoulders which may have limited their arm movement. Sue-Ann, I`m trying to picture that with the scene of the crime. Did they -- I mean, were they

hanging from these pool railings? And if so, how on earth were they murdered that way because they were seated as well as hanging? Can you

describe this or explain it?

LEVY: Yes. They were tied to the railings with the belts, their hands were behind their back and they were strangled. It was believed that they

were strangled to death first with the belts and then tied to the railing. And the contract hit, as I believe it was, was very professionally done to

make it look like a murder-suicide. Unfortunately, the police didn`t wait for the autopsy results to come out on Sunday night, two days after the

bodies were found to really, you know, determine how they were killed or how they were murdered.

BANFIELD: And to be real clear, they had ligature marks around their wrists. However, their wrists were -- well, both, as I understand it, they

had ligature marks around the wrists as though the wrists had been tide. But then when they were found, those wrists were not tied. Meaning,

perhaps that`s how they were killed. But whomever was responsible for the killing, untied the hands to make it look like a murder-suicide, is that

correct?

LEVY: Yes. And I actually believe that they were -- they were -- the killers awaited them when they came home on Wednesday night and that`s why

they were found in their winter coats and surprised them.

BANFIELD: In their winter coats, yes.

LEVY: Yes.

BANFIELD: Well, there`s so many more questions. Sue-Ann, don`t go anywhere, I still have a lot to ask. A lot of it has to do with what his

business was all about and all of those billions of dollars. And, of course, whenever you`re in a big business, maybe there`s some issues and it

turns out with this guy, a lot of issues. Straight ahead, we`re going to get down to what is next in the investigation as well as who might have

been an enemy of this couple.

[19:45:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: A billionaire power couple found dead in their home. And at first, investigators believed Barry and Honey Sherman died of some sort of

murder-suicide.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MURRAY RUBIN, FRIEND OF BARRY SHERMAN: The idea that he killed her or she killed him and submitted suicide is about as logical as my being an

astronaut and sent to the moon for NASA.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[19:49:53] BANFIELD: Well, now, six weeks later, they are calling it not a murder-suicide, a double homicide. And they say the Shermans were

targeted. But why would anybody want to kill this couple known for donating millions to charity? Could their murders be linked to Barry`s

company, the company he founded, Apotex? It brings in more than $1 billion a year selling generic drugs and it`s a business that left Barry with a lot

of lawsuits and a lot of enemies.

With me now, private investigator and former NYPD officer, Bill Stanton. Bill, the kids hired private investigators when they started to get

frustrated and pushed back against the police leaking this notion that it was a murder-suicide. I have a question for you about the enemies list.

When you got a business like that and he`s mired in so many lawsuits, isn`t that really where you first start to look, you know, would the police look

there first?

BILL STANTON, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR AND FORMER NYPD OFFICER: Well, yes, and no. You look from without, meaning what you just said, the possible

competitors, possible people within the company, and from within, possibly family. Did the decedents have lovers, did -- have a lover, did she have a

lover? You look at all of the above. Any possible way for a motive, that`s what you want to look at.

BANFIELD: OK. So then, there`s also the style, this horrendous scene, this murder scene of them strapped by their necks with men`s belts to this

low railing right by the pool in a seated position that looks like they were put there. Does that sort of help you in the investigation as well?

STANTON: Well, yes, it`s a tremendous jumpal point because it tells me this was thought out, this was not random. In my mind`s eye, unless we

find something on their electronic footprint, it definitely wasn`t the male, it wasn`t Barry, to the female. This was done from outside and it

was thought out and it was methodical. And it was done in a way to potentially throw people off, but as the person previously said, to think

unless there was some extenuating circumstances where there was an electronic suicide note, or there was bouts of depression, or there was a

loved one lost, no, this was an outside influence, someone murdered these two, in my opinion.

BANFIELD: So, let me bring in Joey Jackson here. Something else that`s sort of a monkey wrench has been thrown into this thing with a cousin, a

cousin of Barry Sherman. No love lost, by the way, between this cousin and Barry. Lots of litigation, bad business blood between them. And out he

comes to The Daily Mail, Carrie Winters saying that Barry Sherman had twice approached him to kill Honey for him, that he wanted to -- I want you to

whack my wife, Carrie Winters says, he also says, my gut tells me Barry killed Honey. And all I can say is, wouldn`t that be sort of an obvious

for the police to start looking at that cousin, too?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN & HLN LEGAL ANALYST: 100 percent. And so, think about the logic of that. I`m -- you know, I`m in all the time, we`re fighting

every other day, there`s aggression, there`s litigation, but I`m going to come to you and say because you`re such a good friend of mine who I fought

with every day, I want you to do the killing. Does it -- does it make sense? I think this turns on two things, Ashleigh, one is forensics, and

the other is motivation, right? In the event that you`re going to die, there`s going to be, you know, you want to kill yourself. So, what issue

would cause you to do that? Was there something in Denmark that was rotten? Were we having issues and problems, there would be a footprint out

there, text messages out there, something that e-mails together that are out there that we know, right?

BANFIELD: By the way, six weeks? Six weeks --

JACKSON: -- of investigation, yes.

BANFIELD: -- to determine that this is not a murder-suicide, isn`t that crazy?

JACKSON: That is beyond crazy. And so therefore, I think, and I`m glad they took that six weeks because at the end of the day, that gives you the

information to know that it`s not a murder-suicide, it is a homicide- murder. And hopefully, we will get to the bottom of.

BANFIELD: Stay tuned to this space because this story is crazy. It`s not going away. Joey, thank you for that. Sue-Ann Levy, thank you. And Bill

Stanton, thank you as well.

Chicago`s serial stowaway best known for sneaking past security and right on to airplanes and overseas made a couple of scheduled appearances today.

And, no, you`re not -- we`re not repeating last week`s story. The allegations are she has done it again.

[19:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: "ONE MORE THING" for you tonight, in fact, it`s actually two more things for you tonight. Marilyn Hartman, the so-called "serial

stowaway" who has treated us to all of these mugshots, she`s been busted at least a dozen times for breaching airport security. And she was in court

twice today. Twice. For what she`s done lately. First up, she had to answer to charges relating to that free flight that she took to London

which she returned from less than two weeks ago. According to CNN affiliate, WGN, Ms. Hartman seemed a little bit out of sorts in court. Was

blurting out her answers to the judge and then her defender, her public defender jumped in to answer for her. And then, a little later on, she had

to head over to a different courtroom and face a different judge and answer different charges. These ones trespassing for violating an order from the

incident, yes, you guessed it, a few days prior, to stay away from Chicago`s O`Hare Airport.

Both of the judges have agreed Ms. Hartman definitely needs some mental health exams to determine if she is even fit to stand trial. So, stay

tuned. We`ll see what happens in the days to come. We`re going to see you right back here tomorrow night 6:00 Eastern. But before we go, you can now

listen to our show any time by downloading our Podcast on Apple Podcast, iHeart Radio, Stitcher, Tune In, or wherever you get your Podcast from for

your "CRIME & JUSTICE" --

END