By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Twelve years after Aliza Sherman’s murder, Gregory Moore, her former divorce attorney, has been indicted on multiple charges, including aggravated murder and conspiracy. The indictment alleges Moore orchestrated Sherman’s stabbing death to prevent her upcoming divorce trial, luring her to his office building and subsequently attacking her. New evidence, including text messages and phone calls, and a re-investigation by the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigations, led to the indictment. Moore’s prior guilty plea to bomb threats and providing false statements during the initial investigation further incriminated him.
Read the original article here
The arrest of a woman’s divorce attorney, twelve years after her murder, in connection with her 2013 death, is a shocking and complex case. The grand jury indicted the attorney, claiming he killed his client to prevent her divorce trial, scheduled for the following day. This act alone is deeply disturbing, suggesting a callous disregard for human life and professional ethics.
The indictment further alleges that the attorney was simultaneously under investigation for sending bomb threats to the courthouse on days he was scheduled to appear in court, a blatant attempt to avoid his professional responsibilities. His own actions directly contributed to a climate of fear and disruption, highlighting his erratic and potentially dangerous behavior.
It’s particularly unsettling that he pleaded guilty in 2017 to inducing panic related to these bomb threats and to falsification for misleading authorities during the initial investigation into the murder. This suggests a pattern of deception and a willingness to manipulate the system to evade consequences. The fact that he only served six months for these serious offenses raises serious questions about the initial investigation’s thoroughness.
The sheer audacity of his actions is perplexing. Killing someone to avoid a trial, a trial he was ostensibly obligated to prepare for and attend, defies rational explanation. It’s as if he felt entitled to dictate the course of justice, prioritizing his personal convenience over his professional duties and the life of his client.
His motive remains shrouded in uncertainty, prompting speculation. Was he deeply entangled in illegal activities that the trial could expose? Was there a specific aspect of the case he desperately wanted to avoid? The possibilities are troubling, raising questions about the extent of his wrongdoing beyond the murder itself.
The victim, Aliza Sherman, was reportedly facing an abusive husband and fearing for her life as her divorce proceedings progressed. This adds another layer of tragedy to the situation. The attorney’s delays, unreliability, and apparent lack of preparedness only exacerbated her fear and vulnerability. It was a profound breach of trust that cost her her life.
Furthermore, the attorney wasn’t even her original choice. A prior attorney’s suspension led to her case being transferred to him, further highlighting a series of unfortunate circumstances that tragically culminated in her murder. The timeline leading to the murder paints a picture of neglect, incompetence, and ultimately, violence.
The fact that charges were only filed twelve years later raises further concerns about investigative shortcomings. How could such a blatant attempt to evade court appearances—coupled with the subsequent murder of a client—not trigger a more thorough and immediate investigation into the attorney’s involvement?
The sheer number of charges initially levied against the attorney—including inducing panic, terroristic threats, telecommunications fraud, obstructing official business, falsification, forgery, and possessing criminal tools—underlines the gravity of his alleged actions. Even with the plea deal reducing his charges, the sheer scale of potential crimes points to a deeply disturbed individual.
The comments from various people, including lawyers, add further perspective to this case. Many have pointed out that trial work is stressful and unpredictable; however, it’s a core part of legal practice. The comments highlight the availability of alternative legal career paths that would have eliminated the need to appear in court, such as transactional work. This makes the attorney’s actions even more inexplicable and reprehensible. His behavior suggests a severe lack of professional responsibility and a breathtaking level of self-centeredness. His disregard for the law and his client’s life are profoundly disturbing and chilling.
The entire case underscores a significant failure of the justice system, raising questions about how such a dangerous individual could operate for so long without facing more serious and timely consequences for his actions. The twelve-year delay in bringing charges leaves lingering questions about the efficacy of the initial investigation and whether crucial evidence may have been overlooked or ignored. The impact on the victim’s family and the ongoing efforts to bring justice to this case are immeasurable. The attorney’s actions were not merely a matter of professional negligence or incompetence; they represent a shocking betrayal of trust and a heinous crime.