Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 June 2014 - #8

[Oregonmama]

I would love for a miracle to happen and have that little boy alive still, I still can't process why he was a victim if assuming he didn't even know DG and assuming DG wasn't at family functions. Crushing

The following summary and quote from the book, " The Sociopath Next Door" pretty much sums up who DG is.


In the pages of The Sociopath Next Door, you will realize that your ex was not just misunderstood. He's a sociopath. And your boss, teacher, and colleague? They may be sociopaths too.

We are accustomed to think of sociopaths as violent criminals, but in The Sociopath Next Door, Harvard psychologist Martha Stout reveals that a shocking 4 percent of ordinary people—one in twenty-five—has an often undetected mental disorder, the chief symptom of which is that that person possesses no conscience. He or she has no ability whatsoever to feel shame, guilt, or remorse. One in twenty-five everyday Americans, therefore, is secretly a sociopath. They could be your colleague, your neighbor, even family. And they can do literally anything at all and feel absolutely no guilt.

How do we recognize the remorseless? One of their chief characteristics is a kind of glow or charisma that makes sociopaths more charming or interesting than the other people around them. They're more spontaneous, more intense, more complex, or even sexier than everyone else, making them tricky to identify and leaving us easily seduced. Fundamentally, sociopaths are different because they cannot love. Sociopaths learn early on to show sham emotion, but underneath they are indifferent to others' suffering. They live to dominate and thrill to win.

The fact is, we all almost certainly know at least one or more sociopaths already. Part of the urgency in reading The Sociopath Next Door is the moment when we suddenly recognize that someone we know—someone we worked for, or were involved with, or voted for—is a sociopath. But what do we do with that knowledge? To arm us against the sociopath, Dr. Stout teaches us to question authority, suspect flattery, and beware the pity play. Above all, she writes, when a sociopath is beckoning, do not join the game.

It is the ruthless versus the rest of us, and The Sociopath Next Door will show you how to recognize and defeat the devil you know.

 

[Weebles]

Retired homicide detective applauds volunteer search effort

Perry also downplayed the risk of so called crime scene contamination.

He adds “because it will be months before the accused in the case takes the stand, police have plenty of time to continue to build their case against 54-year-old Douglas Garland”.

http://www.660news.com/2014/07/16/retired-homicide-detective-applauds-volunteer-search-effort/

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Please, I repeat, do you find anything inconsistent with what we know so far, rather than unlikely? Inconsistent, meaning contradictory to what we have been told. You don't know what's in DG's mind so what he may or may not have though doesn't count in consistency/inconsistency. I would withdraw my theory if and only if it's not consistent with the facts known. Likelihood is highly subjective.

You can come up with an infinite amount of theories that are consistent with the little we know. Most of them will be highly unlikely based on logic and deduction.

 

[Menci]

Sadly, however, thousands of green balloons (many with strings still attached) were released last night in Airdrie, Calgary, other places in Airdrie and around Canada - with absolutely no regard for the environment, even when people on various online groups organizing these balloon releases brought up the negative impact, they were met with rudeness, criticism, and utter disregard. It was even brought up last evening and the same kind of reaction was received. Sad, IMO.

Hopefully, someone will come up with another method or way to maybe achieve the same sort of effect, but in an environmentally-friendly way. The thought and the heart behind sending balloons into the air was in the right place. It's only through education that we all learn, and do something better.

 

[ztzt]

You can come up with an infinite amount of theories that are consistent with the little we know. Most of them will be highly unlikely based on logic and deduction.

[modsnip]

Any sleuth needs to read up some elementary logic.

 

[ResearchQuest]

The victims in the car accident lived in a place called Stirling and then Cardston, which is close to the US border. Why would Garland have been there on a weekday when he should be studying in Edmonton. I don't think that he was involved in the accident.

Earlier in this thread, someone posted the news article about the crash, and about the other person involved.

 

[PrincessButtercup]

Just as police keep looking, and teams of volunteers keep looking, a family with every right to be paralyzed with grief is out looking, too.

Liknes says if the missing trio was indeed taken in the suspect’s old green pickup truck, as police allege, then there’s probably no need to stray far from easily accessed roads and the fields and ditches that run alongside them.

Liknes knows the truck in question, and he says it just wasn’t up to any serious distance driving or off-road excursions.

“It’s a piece of crap truck,” he says.

Still, he’s trying to arrange for a dirt bike or two to help cover ground the family’s pickups can’t easily access, just in case.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/07/17/relative-of-triple-homicide-victims-we-have-to-find-them

Interesting .... the police have never publicly alleged that the three were taken in the green truck ... this must be info that they only shared with the family.

 

[Weebles]

Looks like some really bad weather expected for the area tomorrow

Reed Timmer ‏@reedtimmerTVN BREAKING: New forecast models show severe wx / tornado event southeast AB and W SK late Thurs. @seanschofertvn will be chasing. Stay tuned

https://twitter.com/reedtimmerTVN

 

[ztzt]

If the investigators feel sure that only one person (DG) was involved in the disappearance, I wonder if they can conclude that all 3 are likely dead from the fact that no one could be feeding them during the days DG was being held.

 

[ResearchQuest]

The same paper that the death notices were in, there was mention of the accident. Accident happened on the Wednesday.
http://newspaperarchive.com/ca/albe...ley&rtserp=tags/?pf=matthew&pl=kemper-hartley

View attachment 54962

So, here is the article about the accident in which MKH and his sister died. They died in a head-on collision with a half-ton truck. No information given on who was driving the half-ton truck. The other accident with the Volkswagen has nothing to do with this, it just happened around the same time. We still don't know if DG was the person driving the half-ton truck.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Well, again, you don't know for sure they told someone about it.

Apparently you don't understand what inconsistency means.

This is my last post on this, as it is getting ridiculous.

I don't know that they told anyone about an alleged furniture pick up, like you don't know anyone arranged a furniture pick up. You cannot argue it both ways without being a total hypocrite. If you are making leaps of logic to form your theory, then when the leaps of logic are called into question, you need to humbly admit you're clinging to your theory, rather than debating objectively.

 

[Sillybilly]

Do you have the date of the accident or obit.? I just have 1980.

The news article that was posted earlier gave October 27, 1980 as the date of the crash. It's in the timeline.

 

[Sillybilly]

Earlier in this thread, someone posted the news article about the crash, and about the other person involved.

There was no mention of the driver of the other vehicle. Directly under that article was a report about another crash. I had to read it twice to notice the two accidents being reported on were not connected to each other.

ETA: ResearchQuest beat me to it

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

If the investigators feel sure that only one person (DG) was involved in the disappearance, I wonder if they can conclude that all 3 are likely dead from the fact that no one could be feeding them during the days DG was being held.

That would not be remotely enough evidence to bring charges. It's a complete supposition, assuming they are imprisoned somewhere.

 

[ztzt]

This is my last post on this

Thank the Lord.

I don't know that they told anyone about an alleged furniture pick up, like you don't know anyone arranged a furniture pick up. You cannot argue it both ways without being a total hypocrite. If you are making leaps of logic to form your theory, then when the leaps of logic are called into question, you need to humbly admit you're clinging to your theory, rather than debating objectively.

Will not waste time teaching logic for free.

 

[winnnancy]

Hopefully, someone will come up with another method or way to maybe achieve the same sort of effect, but in an environmentally-friendly way. The thought and the heart behind sending balloons into the air was in the right place. It's only through education that we all learn, and do something better.

Thank you. The right place to bring this up would be a forum planning a balloon release.

 

[Cattools]

If the investigators feel sure that only one person (DG) was involved in the disappearance, I wonder if they can conclude that all 3 are likely dead from the fact that no one could be feeding them during the days DG was being held.

I would think that to lay the charges, and lay the toughest to prove charges, LE has more to go on than the fact that no one was providing food and water during DG's incarceration. I think, and I may be wrong, that they have crime scene data that has taken time to analyze in a lab that indicates that 3 people died in the house (M00). It could take a while to sort out DNA evidence because about 25% of NO's DNA is the same as KL's, due to their biological relationship.

 

[Menci]

I'd like to know what you guys think about my conjecture in post #838 (click link), in which I imagine DG went to L's house to pick up a piece of furniture, and asked AL to help carry it with him to his pickup truck.

Please read the complete post for details.

Seems to me consistent with everything we know so far (reason for pickup truck, Amber Alert's mentioning Nathan in company with his grandfather, and as another poster said, truck being in front of the house instead of the back, etc.).

The only thing that I can think of that makes this impossible is if DG and AL had not been on speaking terms at all these past years.

Anyone finds any inconsistency in my conjecture with what we know so far? (Definite inconsistency, rather than likelihood or unlikelihood)

I have to agree with the others, sorry ztzt. I don't think for one minute he showed up to pick up furniture or otherwise. Don't forget Nathan's mom was there all day, and surely, something would have been mentioned in conversation if DG showed any interest in getting something from the estate sale, not to mention in conversation with others. My thought is that his arrival at the house was a total surprise to AL and KL. The element of not being expected puts them at a disadvantage. Why would he even risk them knowing he planned to stop by? Then there's room for the plan not to go according to plan, because someone can turn around and change the plan on him. He would want to be in total control.

I think he either entered through an open door, or the door was opened up to him by either AL or KL. One also wonders which door he accessed the house from - front or side? I don't believe he broke in. He had to be prepared with a story of some kind for his presence in either scenario - one for AL if he answered the door, or for KL if she answered the door. If he just walked in to an open house, he would have obviously said he found the door open, and continued his explanation for being there from that point. The likelihood of knowing the door might still be open wouldn't have been something he would have prepared for ahead of time, obviously. And, if he hadn't seen them in recent years, walking in to an open house unannounced might not be as plausible. He was probably prepared for either one of them to come and answer the door.

Regardless, he would have had to act very, very fast to render whoever answered first helpless, and incapicate them, then moving onto the second adult. Nathan was either still up, or perhaps fast asleep due to the excitement and days' activities. If Nathan was present or awoken, there's not much threat of what a 5-year-old could do, other than scream. I'm assuming things happened really fast. There had to be no time for anyone to pick up a landline or a cell phone to call for help. I believe DG moved quickly, but there was certainly what sounds like what probably was a fierce and violent struggle with at least one of the two adults.

I also strongly believe he probably entered with something in his hand, for example - like a pipe - to deliver a strong blow, which could have easily been behind his back. He had to have something on him/with him to further disadvantage AL and KL - I think we all agree on that. The more time anything takes, the more opportunity for something to go wrong. And, to go outside (into the truck to talk) would expose him - I don't think that happened either. It was probably enough that he had to remove the bodies. Whether he had made one of the adults help him with another body is plausible, but I suspect there were no moving bodies - maybe not all deceased yet, but certainly not in a position to pose any threat to DG.

 

[otto]

So nothing really interesting, just an artifact of aerial photography and a working crop farm.

It's hard to say. Another thing to keep in mind is that trails were made decades ago and some of them are still visible in aerial photos.

 

[craftybatchy]

If the investigators feel sure that only one person (DG) was involved in the disappearance, I wonder if they can conclude that all 3 are likely dead from the fact that no one could be feeding them during the days DG was being held.

I think LE was relatively certain the victims were deceased when DG was first taken into custody. They would have had to have more than just the truck footage to formally charge the accused. Forensic evidence is likely what tied DG to the crime scene. Once that evidence was confirmed, Crown would have had what they needed to arrest him the second time.