Clifford Sherwood

[dynoguy88]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the corpse just the lower torso of a boy's body? If so, how would she have been able to identify him even if she did look?

[Mr. Fuji]

Originally Posted by Awsi Dooger

And I can fully understand why the mother wouldn't want to identify a body. You don't want that to be the last memory of your son, potentially a gruesome state. I can still picture two grandparents of mine, with tupes stuck all over their body while in the hospital battling fatal disease. That's my last image of them and it's hard to evict. Plus my little boyhood poodle dooger was killed by a car on Super Bowl Sunday. My last image of him was with the right side of his face smashed. There are plenty of people who can positively identify a body, not just immediate relatives.

I agree with you in your case, but those were different situations. Wouldn't you rather identify them than go your whole life not knowing whether or not they are alive? This mother had the opportunity to identify a body that could have been her child's when her child had gone completely missing. It seems that any loving parent would try to identify the body to either keep hope alive or put closure to it all.

I don't know, I just think that old lady was... I don't know what the word is. I guess I just didn't like her.

[Awsi Dooger]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fuji

I agree with you in your case, but those were different situations. Wouldn't you rather identify them than go your whole life not knowing whether or not they are alive? This mother had the opportunity to identify a body that could have been her child's when her child had gone completely missing. It seems that any loving parent would try to identify the body to either keep hope alive or put closure to it all.

I don't know, I just think that old lady was... I don't know what the word is. I guess I just didn't like her.

I know what you're saying. But if I remember correctly this happened in Quebec, a major population base not a small remote rural area where few people would know Clifford. Seems like there would be friends, teachers or other relatives besides than the mother who could positively identify with the same accuracy. People who would be less traumatized and impacted longterm by seeing him in potentially a butchered state. I guess I'm just not thrilled with the notion only parents can positively identify. Many of them undoubtedly insist on it, just to verify, but if it's not the case, like with Mrs. Sherwood, I don't think the authorities should insist or make a big deal of it.

dynoguy88 may be right, the more I think about it, a partial torso not an intact body. Perhaps that influenced her decision. It would mine.

[Bazorro]

Do you think its possible that Tex would maybe stop the kids and ask them for a ride?

Cliff would see the man and be like 'thats my dad' so they would both get in the car without any struggle. Tex could of took them both back to his house then at some point get the boys by themselves and kills George while Cliff is somewhere else.

Tex could of then asked Cliff to join him for their trip that lasted for those years till Tex came back with his daughters. During that time he could of set up a place for Cliff to live, etc.

[alphagirll]

It said that he (the father) continued to see the daughters on a regular basis, but I don't think they went back to living with him because it said they were in foster care for "the rest of their childhoods".

[JimmyHendricks]

There is no way Clifford Sherwood is still alive. I'm sure his mother has passed away since the segment aired as well. She looked pretty old back in 1992.

What struck me was the mother's unwavering belief that her son was still alive. Why? Well, because she just knew he wasn't dead. Um, that isn't enough. For me at least.

As far as the picture of the "older" Clifford? I think she was mistaken. I think it was a photo of him that she had never seen. It was of him with his father, correct? Well, the pictures could have been taken when he was visiting his father. Of course the mom wouldn't remember the clothes or the picture.

As far as Tex not ever wanting to talk about Clifford? I think either he knew he was dead or that he was so distraght by his disappearance that it scarred him for life.

Long story short, a boy was walking home from school and went missing. The mother never ever let the thought enter her mind that he might be dead, and that's why we had a segment on UM 35 years later. I think if Frances Sherwood had kept an open mind (which I know is hard to do when your child is missing), then she would have come to realize that her son was dead, and would have tried to identify the torso of the boy found, or any other remains. But she was stubborn, and rightfully so. But don't go on TV 40 years later asking your son to come home unless you have some concrete evidence that he is still alive. A couple of pictures isn't enough.

[dindi_x]

Well it's 2006, the year the segment noted that Tex Sherwood's military records would be unsealed. Any updates?

I find it frustrating that Clifford's mom never veiwed the body the police wanted her to see. And I am also frustrated that there's no info on the boy that went missing with Clifford. I have done a little internet research and found Clifford's profile on the Doe Network:

http://www.doenetwork.us/cases/208dmqc.html

This profile doesn't mention the child that went missing with Clifford, but it does mention something that UM didn't: Apparently, a child identified as Clifford phoned his Aunt the day after he went missing. I don't know why they wouldn't have included that in the segment.

[crystaldawn]

Well some of my thoughts on Clifford Sherwood. I do believe they said they found the torso of a child, right? If thats the case as a mother I don't think I could have looked at that and it would have been hard to identify a torso as your child's. Who knows what type of condition it was in. I still don't understand why Clifford's friend name wasn't publicized along with Clifford. If Clifford was abducted by his non-custodial father than wouldn't the parents of the other boy wonder what happened to their own son? Very strange.

Thanks for that link on the doe network!! I hadn't seen it before. Very interesting about the call to his aunt. I know that sometimes UM does leave out a few significant clues from each case so they will know whether the leads were credible or not. It would have added to the segment no doubt but perhaps they withheld it in case someone called the telecenter claiming to be Clifford and they wanted to see if he knew about the phone call. I wonder how many crackpots called the telecenter after the segment aired claiming they were Clifford.

[sdb4884]

In 2006 Tex Cliffords military records were to be turned over to his family. I suppose nothing came of it?

[justins5256]

Originally Posted by sdb4884

In 2006 Tex Cliffords military records were to be turned over to his family. I suppose nothing came of it?

I'm not sure. Short of a family member posting on here, I doubt we'll find out. The latest I heard about this case was that Clifford's mother passed away early last year some time. There was also a person who claimed to be related to the other missing boy, Georges Gumbley, who posted around that time. He mentioned a new theory that the boys decided to ditch school to go fishing and drowned.

I've posted my thoughts on this case before. I don't believe that Tex Sherwood had anything to do with Clifford's disappearance. Therefore I doubt that finding his military records would lead to anything significant. There is little doubt in my mind that Clifford and Georges were either abducted and killed, or drowned, and there is zero chance that they are still alive.

[egswanso]

Originally Posted by justins5256

I'm not sure. Short of a family member posting on here, I doubt we'll find out. The latest I heard about this case was that Clifford's mother passed away early last year some time. There was also a person who claimed to be related to the other missing boy, Georges Gumbley, who posted around that time. He mentioned a new theory that the boys decided to ditch school to go fishing and drowned.

I've posted my thoughts on this case before. I don't believe that Tex Sherwood had anything to do with Clifford's disappearance. Therefore I doubt that finding his military records would lead to anything significant. There is little doubt in my mind that Clifford and Georges were either abducted and killed, or drowned, and there is zero chance that they are still alive.

As to the military records, 20 years after death is when they become public record. Anyone could request them now.

I could certainly see Tex abducted Clifford (it's unclear why he didn't take him in the first place when he took the daughters). His "double life," unusual reactions, and the picture of him and Clifford at least suggest it's not wholly implausible.

Georges is the wildcard. We know nothing about him. I suppose it's possible that Tex killed him (presumably, not in Clifford's presence, with Clifford thinking Georges was going back to Montreal), but that presumes Tex was capable, not just of parental kidnapping, but of murdering a child, a whole different type of crime.

[boniface605]

Long time reader, first time poster. This case has always stuck out for me. (I would have posted sooner, but I couldn't remember the name of the boy.) I would have thought that something would have turned up. A body, some clue that led to an arrest or something like that. The segment on UM always left me with the impression that the father was involved somehow. I'm not sure if this was something intentional on their part or not. Either way, I'm still left with the feeling that the father was involved. Anyway, there's two more cents.

[justins5256]

Originally Posted by boniface605

Long time reader, first time poster. This case has always stuck out for me. (I would have posted sooner, but I couldn't remember the name of the boy.) I would have thought that something would have turned up. A body, some clue that led to an arrest or something like that. The segment on UM always left me with the impression that the father was involved somehow. I'm not sure if this was something intentional on their part or not. Either way, I'm still left with the feeling that the father was involved. Anyway, there's two more cents.

The biggest problem I have with the Sherwood segment is that it is told entirely from the viewpoint of Clifford's mother, Frances Sherwood. She obviously believed that her ex-husband, Tex, kidnapped Clifford and raised him under a new identity and she seemed unwilling to entertain any other possibility.

The segment barely addresses the abduction of the second boy, Georges Gumbley. The fact that Georges and Clifford disappeared simultaneously leads me to believe they both suffered the same fate. They could have been the victims of a sexual predator. Or, they may have died accidentally and their bodies not recovered. A family member posted a few years back and revealed a new theory that they may have decided to skip school to go fishing at the local fishing spot, fell in and drowned.

As much as I love UM, the producers often took liberties and creative license with many of the stories. I think Frances Sherwood's perspective regarding her ex-husband's involvement in Clifford's disappearance made for some compelling television while the most likely conclusion to the case was probably much more mundane.

[boniface605]

It's been a while since I've seen the segment but you're right. It would have been nice to hear other viewpoints on this. I guess I'm one of those types that would be prone to hold out hope that he would be found. But at this point, we may be down to just wanting closure.

[crystaldawn]

I agree with your post Justin in that UM definitely seemed to slant this segment to incinuate that his father abducted him. Why not at least throw out that scenario that Georges' relative mentioned about the boys skipping school and had some sort of accident and drowned. That seems quite plausible...didn't they even show in the reenactment that Clifford and Georges were going to skip school that day and Clifford's best friend decided not to go with them and went on to school? It doesn't make any sense that Tex would abduct Clifford's friend and hide him all these years too. They also want you to think that since Clifford's father didn't want to talk about Clifford's disappearance and if pressed would get violent somehow makes him seem guilty. I always thought that could also be a reaction of grief on his point. Not being able to bear that his only son was out there missing and didn't want to talk about it.