:mad: :mad: the talk about the rizzo case made me think about linda sherman, who met a similar fate, 'cept her cranium was found by a restaraunt.
also another case where the husband is obviously guilty!
it makes me sick to see such a pretty lady like her come to such an end!
anybody heard anything about this case recently? :mad: :mad: :mad:

what is also disturbing is how somebody placed her skull like that

Yeah that case is reminescent of the Monica Rizzo case.

I thought the hubby seemed to know something that he wasn't telling...

That's what I like about UM; it interviewed some people that could be considered suspect more often than AMW does (another show I enjoy).

I wonder if any updates were done on that case. I wonder if the daughter still has any contact w/her father since then??

Yeah, I think that in both cases the people tipping the cops off are the husbands. What losers!!

so i guess it is safe to assume they never found out who placed the skull at the restaraunt?

i remember from the segment that her daughter mentioned she never got up from the couch from where she was sleeping while she was walking out the door to school.
my belief is her husband killed her during the night, instead of her running off with another man and meeting with foul play, as he claims was the case.

I also think the husband did it. The fact that the daughter seen her mother "sleeping" on the couch that morning and her father uncharacteristically taking her to school. Also I remember they speculated that the skull was placed there (in a restaurant frequented often by the husband) as a means to prove that Linda was dead so her husband could remarry. It makes sense in a morbid sort of way.

so the husband has never been charged with anything?
has her family said anything besides what her daughter said?

I haven't heard of any updates about any arrests. Here is her UM profile:

http://www.unsolved.com/0101-LindaSherman.html

You know I had forgotten about the letter that was sent to the police telling them whose skull it was. Just makes the husband seem even more guilty. He definitely must have wanted police to know that she was dead for whatever reason.

it almost seems like somebody else did it because it was left in the bushes just outside her husband's favorite restaraunt.
but due to the other stuff though of course i think he is guilty.

My gut what happened is that he hit her and she fell and hit her head against something and died. No most normal people would report the accident, but since this POS thought he would be charged with murder he hid the body.

My gut what happened is that he hit her and she fell and hit her head against something and died. No most normal people would report the accident, but since this POS thought he would be charged with murder he hid the body.

Normally, I would think that no one could do this, but given the updates in the April Gregory disappearance, I think you could be onto something... but then again, the husband may just have wanted her out of the way so he could remarry, like CD suggested...

If so, then he has got to be one of the most 'composed' wife-killers I've ever seen......much more so than that Rizzo guy.......

I really felt he loved Linda way to much and was way to jealous. The way he might have reacted if he hid the body was to protect himself and the skull just happen to appear when he wanted to get remarried. My guess is that is what happened because the daughter was awake during part of the spat and if he murdered her she would have heard a lot of screaming and things out of place, which leads me to belive he threw a punch or hit her and she fell and broke her neck or hit her head.

The guy is a sick loser but does not seem as sick and twisted as Rizzo's husband. I mean that guy hid his wives bones in the BBQ for cooking to get flavor from.

I just re-watched this segment on my "Bizarre Murders DVDs." It seems pretty obvious to me the poor woman was dead in the morning when he took the girl to school, and that he disposed of her body and moved her car to the airport some time during the day. After that morning when the kid saw her briefly, nobody other than the husband claims to have seen her alive. I'll grant he was one cool customer in the interviews, but it was 15 years ago --- by now he may have managed to convince himself he didn't do it.

Wasn't the Rizzo's marraige kind of stormy as well?

I really felt he loved Linda way to much and was way to jealous. The way he might have reacted if he hid the body was to protect himself and the skull just happen to appear when he wanted to get remarried. My guess is that is what happened because the daughter was awake during part of the spat and if he murdered her she would have heard a lot of screaming and things out of place, which leads me to belive he threw a punch or hit her and she fell and broke her neck or hit her head.

The guy is a sick loser but does not seem as sick and twisted as Rizzo's husband. I mean that guy hid his wives bones in the BBQ for cooking to get flavor from.

Wasn't the Rizzo's marraige kind of stormy as well?

Bump. I think we know who did this.

I watched the segment again today. I know Don Sherman is the popular culprit and maybe he is truly the guilty one but we are taking the word of his daughter - who seemed to be no more than 7-8 years old at the time - that she saw her mother "sleeping". Is this unusual? I don't think so, here's why. She came home at 3am that night. She supposedly got off work at 2am. She fought with Don until 4am (according to Don). Is it that unusual to be dead tired and asleep at 7am or whenever she went to school? I didn't find that strange at all. This is also the possibly distorted memory she has of her mom from a 7 year old.

Secondly, Don claims the skull was found at a popular hangout of his. A place he frequented 2-3 times a week. If that is the case, there would be ample amount of people who would be familiar with this. Don would be a pretty stupid man to plant the skull there. There is the chance of fingerprints and either way the finger is pointed directly at him. Why would he want to make himself a suspect?

I don't believe Don wrote that note either. Why implicate yourself? Hey maybe someone (an accomplice) knew what happened but I do not believe it is Don who wrote it. Yes he was super cool in the interview. Cool like a cucumber. From what I recall people can still remarry if their spouse is missing. What about all the supposed war widows? Or people who remarried when their spouse was supposedly lost at sea for a number of years? Also didn't Paul Pollis remarry despite Charlotte still being missing to this day? I believe the marriage can be anulled if the person is missing for long enough. So I'm not sure about the whole idea that Don planted it there for the world to know she was dead so he could remarry.

I watched the segment again today. I know Don Sherman is the popular culprit and maybe he is truly the guilty one but we are taking the word of his daughter - who seemed to be no more than 7-8 years old at the time - that she saw her mother "sleeping". Is this unusual? I don't think so, here's why. She came home at 3am that night. She supposedly got off work at 2am. She fought with Don until 4am (according to Don). Is it that unusual to be dead tired and asleep at 7am or whenever she went to school? I didn't find that strange at all. This is also the possibly distorted memory she has of her mom from a 7 year old.

Secondly, Don claims the skull was found at a popular hangout of his. A place he frequented 2-3 times a week. If that is the case, there would be ample amount of people who would be familiar with this. Don would be a pretty stupid man to plant the skull there. There is the chance of fingerprints and either way the finger is pointed directly at him. Why would he want to make himself a suspect?

I don't believe Don wrote that note either. Why implicate yourself? Hey maybe someone (an accomplice) knew what happened but I do not believe it is Don who wrote it. Yes he was super cool in the interview. Cool like a cucumber. From what I recall people can still remarry if their spouse is missing. What about all the supposed war widows? Or people who remarried when their spouse was supposedly lost at sea for a number of years? Also didn't Paul Pollis remarry despite Charlotte still being missing to this day? I believe the marriage can be anulled if the person is missing for long enough. So I'm not sure about the whole idea that Don planted it there for the world to know she was dead so he could remarry.

I concur. I'm not saying that Don's innocent, since he may well be guilty, but I don't think it's as cut-and-dry as some seem to think:

1. According to the segment, Linda was having an affair. Was this person ever identified and investigated? Moreover, it gives some credence to the idea that she could have run off with this person.

2. Her daughter didn't remember anything unusual about her mother sleeping - if she was dead, I think even a child would remember Mommy looking funny, or Mommy's chest not moving, or blood, or something... dead people don't look like they are "sleeping." If Don did kill her, why would he leave the body there for the child to see; at the very least, you'd think he would have covered her face.

3. I agree that Don would be pretty stupid to both leave the skull in front of a bar he frequented and send the letter - the argument that he did it for he could remarry is absurd - if he wanted to remarry (and did he, that's not stated), he could have had Linda declared dead and/or simply obtained a divorce. It's inconceivable that a killer, having essentially gotten away with murder, would willingly give LE more evidence to try to make a case.

Certainly, there's circumstantial evidence that the marriage was rocky and Don was controlling, but the lack of physical evidence at the Sherman residence (where, if he killed her, it certainly occurred) is troubling (caveat - I'm assuming a lack of physical evidence based on the segment not mentioning any and a presumption that LE searched the house); the existence of her lover; and the shear stupidity of giving the police the body when you already got away with it gives me pause in the rush to convict that many seem to have.

wow this is weird, the whole time watching it i had a feeling he did it. i mean the way she was lying on the couch, she was dead. and he wanted the kid to be witness saying she was "asleep" then he got rid of her body and car that day...did they check his alibi? where he went that day.

But on the other hand he must be pretty stupid to plant the skull where he hangs out, i mean thats just making it SO obvious. thats the only thing making me think its not him, why not plant the scull somewhere else public where he knew someone would find it.
then why risk writing that note and possibly getting himself arrested when he got away with it.

But also going along with that, WHY would some random killer either who she was having a affiar with or someone else if they DID kill her, why put her skull there?! if it was a random u would think they would kill her get rid of the body and be on there way.

Also another troubling thing is, supposedly she was having a affiar, but from the way they made it out on UM the husband didnt really give her any time to herself, where would she have fit the affair in lol. whenever she wasnt home straight away he was ringing her to find out where she was.

very strange!! i duno, id say the husband did it, probably hit her and she fell and hit her head or he strangled her to death.

As egswano pointed out, Linda was suspected of having an affair. So Don's account of seeing her in a van days after her disappearance may have been valid. As to her daughter finding it odd that she was sleeping, didn't Don say she got off work late and stayed up until three arguing with him? Maybe she was simply exhausted that morning from getting home so late, she really was sleeping on the couch when her daughter saw her. And if Don truly were involved in Linda's death why on Earth would he be stupid enough to put her skull outside of a bar he frequented weekly? That seems to indicate someone was either trying to send a message to Don, or to frame him somehow.

Why put the skull outside of a bar/restaurant he frequented? Because then he'll here about it from the bartender or other patrons the next time he's in and he has someone to verify that he was surprised to hear that a skull was found there. Another reason to put it there because of the question asked several times above, "Why would a guilty person put the skull somewhere they frequent?" The LEOs must have been asking themselves the same question. Although putting it at a regular hang out does make him look guilty, it also throws some suspicion off him because why would Don put it there if he was guilty.

Egswanso, you expect a 7-8 year old child to notice that her mother's chest wasn't moving? I get what you're saying and I agree that dead people don't necessarily look like they're sleeping, but at 18, I'm not sure if I would have noticed that my mother wasn't breathing if I left the house while I thought she was napping on the couch. I agree that there could have been other signs like blood or something of the sort that she could have noticed, just not the chest moving.

I'm not saying Don's guilty. I think there is every possibility that he is not. I think the note is fishy and that it would have been stupid of Don to write it. He also seemed somewhat mystified by the events that happened although that could have been an act. The one thing that mystifies me, is that if Don put the skull there (whether to prove Linda dead so he could remarry or another reason), why wait another whole year before sending the letter to the police. That just doesn't add up to me. It would seem that he would have moved quicker than that to send the letter if he was the one who placed the skull.

This case still isn't solved...and it really troubles me. I am definitely still on the fence about this one. I think Don's attitude was horrid in his interview though. Sing-song voice and all instead of any sadness or emotion.

I don´t know why people are surprised at him putting the skull where he hanged out. It´s the perfect way for him to throw the scent off himself and to try to act as if somebody is trying to frame him. If he wants people to know she was dead and he´s the only suspect, the way to make it seem as if he´s not at fault is to do something like that. Any other way they find the skull and it all goes to him being the suspect but now he can go an act as if the supposed lover or somebody is framing him, which is what he tried to sell. And of course it seems that he won since she was declared dead and he´s still free.

I don´t know why people are surprised at him putting the skull where he hanged out. It´s the perfect way for him to throw the scent off himself and to try to act as if somebody is trying to frame him. If he wants people to know she was dead and he´s the only suspect, the way to make it seem as if he´s not at fault is to do something like that. Any other way they find the skull and it all goes to him being the suspect but now he can go an act as if the supposed lover or somebody is framing him, which is what he tried to sell. And of course it seems that he won since she was declared dead and he´s still free.

But this is still an incredibly stupid thing to do, if he in fact did plant the skull. He could just as easily hid/buried the skull and still kept up the facade that Linda was still alive, living it up with her lover somewhere. Planting the skull brings more heat on him since it could be confirmed 100% that she was dead.

But this is still an incredibly stupid thing to do, if he in fact did plant the skull. He could just as easily hid/buried the skull and still kept up the facade that Linda was still alive, living it up with her lover somewhere. Planting the skull brings more heat on him since it could be confirmed 100% that she was dead.

One thing has always troubled me about this case, and maybe some of you more closely tuned to it can answer this. If Linda was, in fact, having an affair, why didn't her lover ever come forward and report her missing? For all I know, maybe he did. I haven't followed the case incredibly closely, but if it was a serious affair and not just someone she slept with to kill time and relieve boredom, where was this guy when she went missing? Why didn't he raise a stink and look for her? Maybe because he was married, or it wasn't serious, but in my experience, women in marriages like Linda Sherman's have affairs with men they're looking to be with when they finally get the courage to leave their husband. It just seems odd that he didn't come out of the woodwork when she went missing.

But this is still an incredibly stupid thing to do, if he in fact did plant the skull. He could just as easily hid/buried the skull and still kept up the facade that Linda was still alive, living it up with her lover somewhere. Planting the skull brings more heat on him since it could be confirmed 100% that she was dead.

It wasn´t that stupid if he in the end is free. And it totally changed the picture which is a perfect way to do that. Before you had the guy being the last guy seen with her, her daughter seeing her "sleeping" as the last view of her, her leaving for work but no witnesses to her doing that and she not arriving to work and only 1 sighting after that and a dubious one by the suspect himself. He looked almost unquestionable guilty. Now this happens and suddenly there is some doubt from a supposed lover that is trying to set him up. It was actually a good move from his part in the end.

Just saw this case recently and I still don't think Don Sherman is as guilty as others do. It's hard to describe, but I just didn't get the whole "Mark Nichols vibe" during Don's interview. It was confirmed that she was having an affair in the segment and that she had taken off other times before. I think it's just as likely that her lover got mad and killed her if she told him she was going to go back to be with Don and her daughter.

The only thing that seems suspicious is the whole couch event. If that never happened I don't think anyone would suspect Don.

I don't really get the impression that he did it.

The only thing that seems suspicious is the whole couch event. If that never happened I don't think anyone would suspect Don.

I don't really get the impression that he did it.

Don did say that Linda got home late (around 3 in the morning and that they argued for over an hour). I could see how after an argument she would have slept on the couch. Since she got home late, I could also see why she would have still been sleeping when her daughter went to school.

I have my suspicions about the guy, but honestly, I'd be lying if I said that my impression of him wasn't tainted by the casual manner in which he conducted himself during the UM interview. It was so unfeeling.

I have my suspicions about the guy, but honestly, I'd be lying if I said that my impression of him wasn't tainted by the casual manner in which he conducted himself during the UM interview. It was so unfeeling.

I guess you could argue that he had an icy demeanor because he thought Linda ran off with another man and abandoned him and his daughter, and that he thought that her lover or someone else was responsible for her death while everyone else in the town thought he was the one who did it.

This was a good Riverfront Times article about Linda's case that came out years ago: http://www.riverfronttimes.com/1999-11-17/news/body-of-evidence/

While there were several separations and reconciliations, Linda had always taken her daughter with her when she had left Don on previous occasions. She was already mailing her paychecks to her sister's home; there wasn't any credible reason for her to be hiding in a van from Don.

The coworker that Don believed that Linda was seeing had an alibi and was ruled out as a suspect. The RT article notes that one of Don's ex girlfriends stated that Don had confessed to the murder, but at the time the investigator wouldn't discuss that information.

We all have different takes on it, and it seems bizarre that someone would deliberately plant a skull at a restaurant that they were known to patronize, but it's also just as unlikely that a unknown perpetrator would have enough knowledge about Don's comings and goings 5 years later so as to place the skull there, and to then send a flier from the same place to police about the skull being Linda's.

Thanks for posting that link! Some questions I have about it though, the article has Linda's daughter saying she has a "dream" about going to school and seeing her mom asleep on the couch and her not waking up to kiss her goodbye. Is this a real memory of hers, or simply a dream? And Don Sherman does seem pretty cold in the interview, especially the way he told his daughter when they found Linda's remains. But at the end of the article, I thought it was interesting that Don still had he and Linda's wedding album easily accessible and brought it out for the reporters and was showing them pictures and reminiscing about the wedding. I know it's not an indicator of guilt or innocence, but I would think if Don wanted her dead and killed her, the last thing he would have kept around would have been their wedding album.

I'd bet a nickel the rest of her is in Leonard Rizzo's back yard...

I default assume the spouse always does it, unless there is a good reason to assume otherwise, as that overwhelmingly is the case for most murders.
This seems a classic UM case: wife mysteriously disappears, history of domestic violence, totally out of character for them to disappear. It's very hard to look past him doing it.
Ultimately this is the OJ question. If the husband didn't do it then who the hell did?

Whoever put Linda's skull at the restaurant had to go find her remains (wherever they were being kept) and deliberately dig up only the skull to then plant it at the restaurant where Don frequented. I just get the vibe that this was done as more of a threat (or to frame) Don, rather than Don planting it solely so he could prove that Linda was dead to get remarried.

I wonder if Don could have killed her and then called in a favor from someone to help him dispose of the body. A close friend at the time perhaps that he paid or promised to pay at some point for helping. Years later a falling out could have occurred at which point the friend decided “okay, fine. I’m turning your ass in”. What can Don do at that point except just deny it? If he killed her himself, he would have no leverage on someone that helped dispose of the body.

This person would then know where to find the skull and likely where Don hangs out regularly. After some time has passed, the police haven’t made the connection, so the friend tips off the police as to it being Linda’s skull.

I'm curious if there is still an active investigation. Was Don Sherman (who is now dead) the only person considered a suspect?

I'm curious if there is still an active investigation. Was Don Sherman (who is now dead) the only person considered a suspect?

He died?

He died?

Yes, in 2015

https://www.styningerfuneralhomes.com/notices/Donald-Sherman

I'm curious if there is still an active investigation. Was Don Sherman (who is now dead) the only person considered a suspect?

Fair question. I always assumed that Don was the killer. I find the theory that he had help disposing her body and that the skull was left as a threat to Don just fascinating. Never thought of that angle.

I was listening to The Vanished podcast this morning and heard an episode (http://www.thevanishedpodcast.com/episodes/2021/5/17/episode-284-donna-gibson#comments-609ac9c107cd93296bc221f2=) about Donna Gibson (https://charleyproject.org/case/donna-kay-gibson), and this case immediately reminded me of Linda Sherman. From Charley Project:

Gibson was last seen at her residence on Route 601 in Louisa, Virginia on the night of February 25, 1995. She had lived in the home for approximately four years with her husband and three children. Her daughter saw her lying asleep on the couch in the early morning hours.

Several hours later, she had vanished. She left all her clothing and personal belongings behind, including her cigarettes, contact lenses and glasses. There was no evidence of forced entry to the home and no evidence of a struggle.

Gibson's son was a light sleeper and said normally, if someone walked around in the house during the night, the creaking floorboards woke him up. He heard nothing that night.

Investigators at the time believed Gibson might have left home with the intention of coming back soon. She has never been heard from again. Her case remains unsolved and her children believe she met with foul play.

It's not mentioned on Charley Project, but in the Vanished episode, it is confirmed that Donna was having an affair on her husband shortly before she went missing. The obvious difference between the two cases is that Donna Gibson is still missing, but another key difference is that it seems like the police never really seriously considered Donna Gibson's husband as a viable suspect, despite the fact that he was in the home on the evening that she disappeared. Don Sherman was always viewed as the prime suspect in Linda's disappearance and death.

So strange that I randomly picked to watch this segment this afternoon and came to post here about it only to see this thread on the first page after it hadn’t been posted in for over two years. :eek:

Anyway, I’ve always leaned toward Don being guilty in this case, but I’m closer to 50/50 than I am to 100%. I’m probably about 60-65% convinced of his guilt. It just makes no sense to dig up her skull and plant it at your regular watering hole so many years after the fact. Also, the theory that someone who was capable of murdering his own wife and completely get away with it would risk getting busted for it years later just so he could get married again seems preposterous to me. I don’t think a person like that cares enough about the sanctity of marriage to risk their own freedom just for a piece of paper. Stranger things have happened, but I’m so confused on so many details of this case. :confused:

So strange that I randomly picked to watch this segment this afternoon and came to post here about it only to see this thread on the first page after it hadn’t been posted in for over two years. :eek:

Anyway, I’ve always leaned toward Don being guilty in this case, but I’m closer to 50/50 than I am to 100%. I’m probably about 60-65% convinced of his guilt. It just makes no sense to dig up her skull and plant it at your regular watering hole so many years after the fact. Also, the theory that someone who was capable of murdering his own wife and completely get away with it would risk getting busted for it years later just so he could get married again seems preposterous to me. I don’t think a person like that cares enough about the sanctity of marriage to risk their own freedom just for a piece of paper. Stranger things have happened, but I’m so confused on so many details of this case. :confused:

Hi HJ! :wave::wave:

Glad you are back! I've been wanting thank you for your work on the episode guides which I use regularly to this day. It's been extremely helpful!

Yes, in 2015

https://www.styningerfuneralhomes.com/notices/Donald-Sherman

Very interesting. So he's gone. It is unlikely we'll ever know the truth.

I do find it strange her skull shows up right at his favourite watering hole. If Don did that he is talking a gigantic risk placing a human skull out in the open where someone could have seen him do this. If he did it, I think it makes more sense to keep the body wherever it was, rather than expose it.

So there's that. But I will admit I have always hated Don's demeanor. He says he didn't have anything to do with "Linda Sherman's" death or disappearance. That's a strange way to word it. I don't know. The daughter seems to think he did it.

I find it interesting in the obituary that his daughter is not mentioned in the obituary. Patricia I mean. But there is a "life partner" named Sue Gale and her children as well as what it says another daughter named Hannah Sherman. I assume that was a kid they had together? Anyway, no mention of Linda at all in that obituary. He was also cremated. And there is one comment on the part in his obituary where you can leave them that says "You killed Linda!"

So I guess he never really got re-married, at least not to her. So does that throw out the whole "wanting to get re-married" angle? He's a confident guy, and you would think he shouldn't have been that confident especially with the dead body. There could be the possibility of fingerprints and such on the skull. Who knows.

But as much as his actions are suspect I still can't just automatically say the guy is guilty. Because there is no physical evidence.

One last thing, where is his daughter from the segment? Any idea what she is up to now?

I'm surprised I never commented on this case. I know a lot point toward the husband here, but I truly believe he is innocent. The skull being placed at one of his favorite hangouts, in a small town, isn't that unusual IMO. Especially if someone is trying to frame him and knew places that he liked to frequent. What I cant figure out is why whoever is responsible for her death dug up only her skull and placed it there? What purpose did it serve other than to just frame Don for her murder?

Hi HJ! :wave::wave:

Glad you are back! I've been wanting thank you for your work on the episode guides which I use regularly to this day. It's been extremely helpful!

Maybe he dug up his wifes skull and placed it there so it gets discovered quicker and linked to him faster? And for life insurance reasons?! Maybe they needed evidence of a dead body and if his wife was still missing: that equals no life insurance money. I have to watch this segment again to see if they mentioned life insurance....