Hi Everyone,
I was curious about the case of Clifford Sherwood. Does anyone know if there have been any new developments? I know that UM indicated that Clifford's fathers records were set to become public property 20 years after his death, which in 1992 was scheduled for the year 2006. It is now almost the end of 2009. DOes anyone know if any information was unearthed from those records?
Whatever happened to Clifford's mother? Is she still alive? I believe she would be about 90 years old today? I always hoped that she would be able to find her son. What happened to his sisters?
I too am troubled by Georges Gumbley, and how there is no mention of him. Not on UM, and not on the Doe network. While I thought there was strong evidence that Clifford's father could have kidnapped Clifford, it makes no sense that Georges Gumbley seemed to disappear off the face of the earth, and no one ever looked into what happened to him.
What do you think may have happened to him? Do you think it's also possible that Georges could have been the unidentified boy who was discovered shortly after the disappearance? If Tex Sherwood indeed kidnapped his son, then what would he have done with Georges? What reason would he even have had, to kidnap or do away with Georges?
I'm eager to hear other theories!

Clifford's mother, Frances Sherwood, passed away earlier this year. So far as I know, she never did find out what happened to her son.

There has been a lot of discussion about this case on the boards, including some contributions by a family member of Georges Gumbley.

Many people have commented on the fact that UM basically ignored Georges' abduction and this has been a source of discontent among UM fans, so you're not the first to notice that. It seems preposterous that they would seemingly ignore that part of the story. But, I think UM wanted to pursue and showcase the parental abduction angle, and Georges' disappearance really doesn't fit or lend a lot of credence to that theory, imo. You would not only have to assume that Tex Sherwood abducted Clifford, but that he presumably murdered Georges Gumbley. That's a bit of a leap, especially considering what little info we have on Mr. Sherwood.

As for me, I always thought that the two boys may have been abducted and murdered by a pedophile. The torso found could have been the remains and I never understood why Mrs. Sherwood never even wanted the chance to identify them. I can understand her wanting to believe Clifford was alive, but I think she should have at least entertained the very realistic possibility that he was dead and the remains might have been his or even Georges.

A family member posted a new theory that the boys may have decided to skip school and go fishing at a local fishing spot, but fell in to the water and and drowned. I could see that being a possibility too.

This segment never sat right with me for a number of reasons. First, they totally ignored the abduction of Georges. Second, the entire segment was basically a smear campaign against Mr. Sherwood with not one shred of credible evidence to substantiate any of the mother's claims about her ex-husband having anything to do with Clifford's abduction. Finally, maybe I missed the boat on this one, but I never understood how finding Tex Sherwood's military records would help find Clifford.

The only item that made me think Clifford was alive and with his father was the picture of him they showed in the segment. He was apparently older in this snapshot, correct? That lead me to think that Clifford was indeed abducted, and his friend's case totally unrelated. But then you have to wonder why Clifford never tried to find his mother in adulthood, unless he was possibly brainwashed (like the Baskin kids might have been). Who knows...:confused:

The only item that made me think Clifford was alive and with his father was the picture of him they showed in the segment. He was apparently older in this snapshot, correct? That lead me to think that Clifford was indeed abducted, and his friend's case totally unrelated. But then you have to wonder why Clifford never tried to find his mother in adulthood, unless he was possibly brainwashed (like the Baskin kids might have been). Who knows...:confused:

There wasn't a date on the photos. I don't recall how old Clifford was when he vanished but I think the photos could have been taken at any time. He was pre-pubescent if I recall, and a lot of boys don't really start to look that different until puberty sets in. His father had joint custody and Clifford did spend time alone with his father so the pictures could have been taken without the mother being there which would account for her not remembering them being taken. Also, if Tex had pictures of Clifford post-abduction, why would he send them to Frances or other family members?

Thanks for the updates, Justin. I am sorry to hear of the passing of Mrs. Sherwood, and that she died not knowing whatever happened to her child. You are right, with regards to Georges Gumbley, that UM seemed intent on pursuing the parent-abduction angle. But the other theories, such as the boys drowning or perhaps being victim of a pedophile, could have been very real possibilities, and I agree with you that Mrs. Sherwood should have at least tried to look at the remains to see if she could identify them.
I recall seeing on the UM segment that both Clifford AND Georges' disappearance made the papers, and both were unsolved. As per the family photographs, I don't think that they were sent to Frances, but IIRC, Clifford's sister Colleen found them among her father's personal effects and sent them to their mother. I also think that Colleen and Mrs. Sherwood were eager to see the military records b/c they thought that Tex may have used his military alias to create a new life for Clifford (Edward Thorne). That is, if in fact Tex kidnapped Clifford. I also recall how Colleen said that Tex would get very defensive whenever one of the sisters questioned what happened to Clifford, and would even throw things around the house. HIs reaction does make me wonder what he knows.
Also, what do you guys think of the last clue that was mentioned in the segment, of the drivers' license record for Edward Clifford Sherwood. It was thought that this could be Clifford, b/c the birthdate was the same, and the first and middle names were reversed. But before Edward could be contacted, he moved and left no new address. Do you think that this man could be Clifford?

I just saw on the DOe Network where Clifford disappeared 55 years ago last week, Oct. 21, 1954. Oct. 21 is also the same day that Marlene Santana was abducted. Wow. I hope that someday (just as with Marlene) the truth may be known, about what happened to him.

Yes, and I had no luck on inquiries as to what was done with the remains, which, if located, could be DNA tested against the Sherwood and Gumbley families. And couldn't the spot be dragged to see if the other boy could have been there undiscovered? They did this with the Tzar of Russia's family's remains, which were older and easily in worse shape, effectively solving the Anastasia mystery.

I did some digging and found the thread I mentioned earlier. This is the thread where a cousin of Georges Gumbley posted what he knew about the case. I have highlighted the name Gumbley so you can skip to the passages pertaining to Georges.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=169032&highlight=gumbley

There is also a neat post in this thread written by mozart in which he talks about the statistical probability of a randomly selected group of 23 people and 2 people in that group having the same birth date. He also goes into the "Sherwood" name which is apparently pretty common throughout Canada. I won't steal his thunder (I think he still posts here, lol) but he shoots some pretty big holes in the theory that the person UM found with the closely matching name and birth date was Clifford Sherwood.

Tex Sherwood's behavior after Clifford's disappearance doesn't mean anything, imo. People react to tragedy differently. I think the segment mentioned that Tex was a drunk and had the potential to be a violent drunk at that. Clifford's abduction could have angered him and he didn't know how to cope with those emotions which would have been exacerbated by alcohol. Of course, the fact that Tex got upset when questioned is proof positive to those who believe that he abducted Clifford. I just feel it's too subjective to say one way or another.

True, and perhaps Tex was not only a mean drunk, but a mean drunk insulted at what he saw as implications he was a child abductor and murderer. (If not a murderer, what happened to Georges?)

Thanks for the link, Justin! The other messages and theories were very interesting to read through. I have been meaning to go back and look at Mrs. Sherwood's obituary. I was sorry to hear of her passing.
yOu are right about Tex's reactions. I never thought that he could possibly react so violently because, in his own way, he might have been grieving. Or, he could have been angered at the fact that he was thought to have had something to do with Clifford's disappearance. The other theories presented in the posts sounded very credible, like the boys running away, or playing hooky and falling into the river and perhaps drowning. I think it is unfortunately that the UM story would seem so one-sided, if the boys did run away, drown, or were victims of a pedophile.
I've noticed that this isn't the first time that a UM story has been one sided. I recall other stories where one strong theory is presented and then, when the mystery is finally solved, it turns out that something totally different happened after all. I was watching the case about a man whose mother was murdered in New Hampshire, in 1964, presumably by a delivery man who was a suspect in the murders of 2 other girls. (I think the mother was about to testify against him?) Then the woman's son died about 25 or 30 years later. He had led a troubled life, and he died a freak death, when he was shot while welding. The way UM presented the story, and hinted at certain theories, you were led to think that the delivery man was somehow responsible for the death of the son. BUT it turned out that it was the man's stepdaughter and her boyfriend who shot him. So mother and son were 2 unrelated tragedies. I Think the son's murder was solved sometime in the mid-2000's. (Does anyone remember mother and son's name? Sorry if the details are fuzzy).
And of course, who could forget the case of Danny WHeeler. UM was so certain it was either Pat Snead, Bob Bean or Sammy "I'm Michael Jordan" Wheeler. When i first saw the case, I always thought it would end up being one of them! But then, lo and behold, it turns out that Danny's murder was random after all.
Speaking of pat, Bob and Michael JOrdan, i wonder how they felt when they realized they were all blaming each other for nothing. I wonder if they ever reconciled, or if they never spoke again.
ON a lighter note, I still can't get over Sammy saying he was Michael Jordan. THat always cracks me up:lol:

Speaking of pat, Bob and Michael JOrdan, i wonder how they felt when they realized they were all blaming each other for nothing. I wonder if they ever reconciled, or if they never spoke again.

How about the U-Haul family where the man accused his brother of having his wife murdered, then it turned out to have been randomly done by a stranger?

This should have never been an UM case, because Clifford Sherwood died the same day he disappeared, in my opinion. I believe he and his friend George were abducted and murdered, or accidently drowned. The torso of the boy was almost certainly one of them.

Watching the case when it originally aired (as a ten year old), I was captivated. But re-watching it over and over on Lifetime put it in a different light for me. To me, the big flashing warning light that the story wasn't credible was when Clifford's mother refused to identify the torso of the young boy that had been found. Now, think about it. A boy (in this case two boys, although UM didn't mention this) goes missing. There is no trace of him/them. Then, the torso of a young boy is found in the area where he disappeared. Hmmm....wouldn't you assume that perhaps, just perhaps, it might be one of the boys? And if just a torso of one of the boys was found, that doesn't bode well for the other, does it?

Clifford's mother? She refused to see the torso, because, according to her in the segment, she "just knew" it wasn't him. "I knew that wasn't my boy". Um, could it be that you were to afraid to face the fact that your son was dead? 40 years later, there she is on UM, talking about how her evil ex-husband abducted Clifford, created a new identity for him, and eliminated all traces of his existence, simply because of a couple of photos where he looked older and had clothes he didn't recognize.

My mom, like Clifford's, was a very loving, hands on, stay at home mom. I grabbed a photo album with various pictures from my childhood, and asked her if she could tell me how old I was in the photos, some 20 years later. I didn't know, and neither did she. I heard a lot of "I think you were about 5 or 6 then", but no definite, confident answers. Yet, Clifford's mother, looking at the photos some 30-40 years after she last saw her son, was able to 100% identify that he was older than nine years old. Again, is this a confident answer, or a woman who wants to keep hope alive that her son wasn't that torso?

The whole idea that Tex had masterminded some kind of elaborate plot to kidnap Clifford and create a new identity is so convoluted. If he did that to Clifford, what about George? Oh wait, that wouldn't go along with the theory, so George isn't mentioned. UM really dropped the ball on that one.

This case should have ended shortly after it started, with Frances Sherwood tearfully identifying the body of her son, who was murdered. Instead, we get Frances Sherwood tearfully pleading with her son, who had been dead for 30 years, to please come home.

I did some digging and found the thread I mentioned earlier. This is the thread where a cousin of Georges Gumbley posted what he knew about the case. I have highlighted the name Gumbley so you can skip to the passages pertaining to Georges.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=169032&highlight=gumbley

There is also a neat post in this thread written by mozart in which he talks about the statistical probability of a randomly selected group of 23 people and 2 people in that group having the same birth date. He also goes into the "Sherwood" name which is apparently pretty common throughout Canada. I won't steal his thunder (I think he still posts here, lol) but he shoots some pretty big holes in the theory that the person UM found with the closely matching name and birth date was Clifford Sherwood.

Tex Sherwood's behavior after Clifford's disappearance doesn't mean anything, imo. People react to tragedy differently. I think the segment mentioned that Tex was a drunk and had the potential to be a violent drunk at that. Clifford's abduction could have angered him and he didn't know how to cope with those emotions which would have been exacerbated by alcohol. Of course, the fact that Tex got upset when questioned is proof positive to those who believe that he abducted Clifford. I just feel it's too subjective to say one way or another.

Thanks for the shout out, justins5256! I do still read the forum and post occasionally, but the big, long posts are mostly a thing of the past with no new cases to discuss and no supply of old cases I haven't seen at my disposal. I do occasionally re-watch what I have, thinking that sometimes a case might catch my attention in a way it didn't before, but the last few times that happened, I went to post my thoughts, and found that I'd already posted about the case in question, and had the same thoughts years ago that I was going to post now!

Bottom line: we need more cases!

This should have never been an UM case, because Clifford Sherwood died the same day he disappeared, in my opinion. I believe he and his friend George were abducted and murdered, or accidently drowned. The torso of the boy was almost certainly one of them.

Watching the case when it originally aired (as a ten year old), I was captivated. But re-watching it over and over on Lifetime put it in a different light for me. To me, the big flashing warning light that the story wasn't credible was when Clifford's mother refused to identify the torso of the young boy that had been found. Now, think about it. A boy (in this case two boys, although UM didn't mention this) goes missing. There is no trace of him/them. Then, the torso of a young boy is found in the area where he disappeared. Hmmm....wouldn't you assume that perhaps, just perhaps, it might be one of the boys? And if just a torso of one of the boys was found, that doesn't bode well for the other, does it?

Clifford's mother? She refused to see the torso, because, according to her in the segment, she "just knew" it wasn't him. "I knew that wasn't my boy". Um, could it be that you were to afraid to face the fact that your son was dead? 40 years later, there she is on UM, talking about how her evil ex-husband abducted Clifford, created a new identity for him, and eliminated all traces of his existence, simply because of a couple of photos where he looked older and had clothes he didn't recognize.

My mom, like Clifford's, was a very loving, hands on, stay at home mom. I grabbed a photo album with various pictures from my childhood, and asked her if she could tell me how old I was in the photos, some 20 years later. I didn't know, and neither did she. I heard a lot of "I think you were about 5 or 6 then", but no definite, confident answers. Yet, Clifford's mother, looking at the photos some 30-40 years after she last saw her son, was able to 100% identify that he was older than nine years old. Again, is this a confident answer, or a woman who wants to keep hope alive that her son wasn't that torso?

The whole idea that Tex had masterminded some kind of elaborate plot to kidnap Clifford and create a new identity is so convoluted. If he did that to Clifford, what about George? Oh wait, that wouldn't go along with the theory, so George isn't mentioned. UM really dropped the ball on that one.

This case should have ended shortly after it started, with Frances Sherwood tearfully identifying the body of her son, who was murdered. Instead, we get Frances Sherwood tearfully pleading with her son, who had been dead for 30 years, to please come home.

Some of the very same points I made - though not with same level of exasperation! - in the earlier thread. Good post.

It's STILL an Unsolved Mystery as NO ONE knows which (if either) boy the torso was, and, if it wasn't either of them, who it might be and what happened to them. Suppose the evidence (remains) are probably lost or the P. D. is too damn cheap and lazy to test them as has been true in other cases.

It's STILL an Unsolved Mystery as NO ONE knows which (if either) boy the torso was, and, if it wasn't either of them, who it might be and what happened to them. Suppose the evidence (remains) are probably lost or the P. D. is too damn cheap and lazy to test them as has been true in other cases.

Yeah, I think the story was interesting and still worthy of being profiled since someone did, most likely, get away with murdering two young boys. Even if we assume they weren't murdered, they are still missing and their families deserve to know the truth about what became of them, whatever that truth may be.

I just think UM dropped the ball with the presentation by spending too much time on the Tex Sherwood angle when there was so little evidence to support it aside from the mother's blind faith in her belief that her ex had something to do with Clifford's disappearance.

At the end of the day, I have to remind myself that UM is television and sometimes sensational tabloid television at that. Somehow the story of these two young boys playing hokey and drowning in the local fishing hole just doesn't cut it compared to a story about a messy divorce, parental custody issues, abduction, an impostor using a false name and other smoke and mirror intrigue.

I was watching the case about a man whose mother was murdered in New Hampshire, in 1964, presumably by a delivery man who was a suspect in the murders of 2 other girls. (I think the mother was about to testify against him?) Then the woman's son died about 25 or 30 years later. He had led a troubled life, and he died a freak death, when he was shot while welding. The way UM presented the story, and hinted at certain theories, you were led to think that the delivery man was somehow responsible for the death of the son. BUT it turned out that it was the man's stepdaughter and her boyfriend who shot him. So mother and son were 2 unrelated tragedies. I Think the son's murder was solved sometime in the mid-2000's. (Does anyone remember mother and son's name?



That was the case of Rena and Danny Paquette. I did an internet search to see about updates because I always thought this was an interesting case.