Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #10

[otto]

Yes, you're the one who said serial killer .... then edited your post to add the mass murderer part.

No. I was responding to this comment, and then added to my response to the below comment that the term used was "mass murderer".

Interesting interview with the Chief of LE on the 23rd. I apologize if this is a duplicate.

At one point RH refers to DG as a serial killer....

http://www.newstalk770.com/2014/07/23/35834/

 

[julydarling]

As it's Wikipedia, take it with a grain of salt.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_killer
However... these are the points that stick out to me. (Taken from the characteristics portion)
-They may exhibit varying degrees of mental illness and/or psychopathy, which may contribute to their homicidal behavior - CHECK
- They were frequently bullied or socially isolated as children or adolescents - CHECK
- Some were involved in petty crimes, such as theft, fraud, vandalism, dishonesty or similar offenses CHECK

Those are just the characteristics that we can prove while knowing next to nothing about DG.
I also recall several times while following other cases (Sorry, not a ton of time to be reading pages and pages online right now) that serial killers first go "active" when in mid to late 20s.
As I said earlier, I seriously doubt that this is DG's first foray into murder. Perhaps he's not a serial killer in the terms of "hey, i feel like killing today" but I think this quiet man used violence to validate himself and give himself power. JMO

 

[CalgaryFilly]

Yes, you're the one who said serial killer .... then edited your post to add the mass murderer part.

Actually, the "serial killer" was my error. I was going from memory and should has listened to the interview again. My apologies.

 

[bethmcneilly]

I have been following this case and I keep wondering what the 'covert assets' are that assisted police in their investigation?

"While Hanson wouldn't go into the circumstances of Garland's arrest, Garland was bound by a court-ordered curfew and likely under police surveillance at the time. During the chief's statement to the media, Hanson referred to "covert assets" that assisted in the police investigation."

This has always stuck out to me and really makes me wonder. The above quote was on many news sites, including here: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Douglas+Garland+charged+with+three+counts+murder+deaths+Nathan+Brien+grandparents/10030409/story.html

 

[goodasgold]

I feel LE knew who to suspect from the beginning. I think that is why JO said that they think Nathan is out there because he was not supposed to be there. She probably knew DG had a problem with AL but would not go as far to kill NO. She may have even seen the truck driving around when she left that night. As for releasing the footage of the truck, as if they did not know whose it was, i feel that was to get witnesses to come forward and state if they saw anyone else with the driver in the truck. As well as to make DG think they were not on to him yet. I feel when RO said "whoever has NO please drop him off somewhere to be rescued" he was talking directly to DG to make him feel he can let him go without worry of getting caught but it was already too late for NO i assume. I also feel they held off the reward since the family had money issues and DG was related to the family through his sister. I think LE wanted to rule out a set up for money, once they confirmed it was murder they arrested DG. I believe LE wanted DG to think that they are not even thinking of murder so he would not run, hence all the comments we are hoping to find them alive. JMO

 

[otto]

Actually, the "serial killer" was my error. I was going from memory and should has listened to the interview again. My apologies.

No worries ... we know that the suspect is charged with three murders. The fact that they all happened at the same time makes him a "mass murderer" rather than a "serial murderer" ... same end result of three victims, three charges, and most likely three convictions ... still a possibility that he has earned the "dangerous offender" designation.

"Significant changes to the high-risk offender provisions were contained in The Tackling Violent Crime Bill that came into force on July 2, 2008. The reforms include these provisions:
•An offender who gets a third conviction for a primary designated violent or sexual crime that should result in a sentence of at least two years is now presumed to be a dangerous offender, if two previous convictions each resulted in a sentence of two years or more. The offender is given an opportunity to show why he or she should not be designated a dangerous offender;
•When an individual is convicted for a third time of a "designated offence", the Crown prosecutor has a duty to confirm to the court that a dangerous offender application has been considered;
•Where the court is satisfied that the offender meets the Dangerous Offender criteria in section 753, in all cases the individual will be designated a Dangerous Offender. The designation is for life.
•Once designated as a Dangerous Offender, the court will impose a sentence that must ensure public safety, which can be either; ◦An indeterminate sentence of imprisonment, with no chance of parole for 7 years;
◦A regular sentence of imprisonment for the offence, plus a Long-term Supervision Order in the community of up to 10 years after the regular sentence has expired; or,
◦A regular sentence of imprisonment for the offence.

•An individual who is designated as a dangerous offender but does not receive an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment will be subject to a re-determination of the indeterminate sentence if that individual subsequently breaches a condition of their Long-term Supervision Order or commits another serious personal injury offence. The Crown will not have to satisfy the court that the offender is a dangerous offender for the latest offence;
•The duration of peace bonds placed on individuals who are a high-risk to commit sexual and/or violent offences and who have been convicted of such offences in the past has been increased from one to two years; and
•The conditions that can be imposed under peace bonds have been expanded to include residency, electronic monitoring, treatment and others."

http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/c...st-hgh-rsk-ffndrs/dngrs-ffndr-dsgntn-eng.aspx

Section 753 of the Criminal Code:

"753. (1) On application made under this Part after an assessment report is filed under subsection 752.1(2), the court shall find the offender to be a dangerous offender if it is satisfied

(a) that the offence for which the offender has been convicted is a serious personal injury offence described in paragraph (a) of the definition of that expression in section 752 and the offender constitutes a threat to the life, safety or physical or mental well-being of other persons on the basis of evidence establishing

(i) a pattern of repetitive behaviour by the offender, of which the offence for which he or she has been convicted forms a part, showing a failure to restrain his or her behaviour and a likelihood of causing death or injury to other persons, or inflicting severe psychological damage on other persons, through failure in the future to restrain his or her behaviour,


(ii) a pattern of persistent aggressive behaviour by the offender, of which the offence for which he or she has been convicted forms a part, showing a substantial degree of indifference on the part of the offender respecting the reasonably foreseeable consequences to other persons of his or her behaviour, or


(iii) any behaviour by the offender, associated with the offence for which he or she has been convicted, that is of such a brutal nature as to compel the conclusion that the offender’s behaviour in the future is unlikely to be inhibited by normal standards of behavioural restraint; or



(b) that the offence for which the offender has been convicted is a serious personal injury offence described in paragraph (b) of the definition of that expression in section 752 and the offender, by his or her conduct in any sexual matter including that involved in the commission of the offence for which he or she has been convicted, has shown a failure to control his or her sexual impulses and a likelihood of causing injury, pain or other evil to other persons through failure in the future to control his or her sexual impulses."

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-753.html

 

[otto]

I have been following this case and I keep wondering what the 'covert assets' are that assisted police in their investigation?

"While Hanson wouldn't go into the circumstances of Garland's arrest, Garland was bound by a court-ordered curfew and likely under police surveillance at the time. During the chief's statement to the media, Hanson referred to "covert assets" that assisted in the police investigation."

This has always stuck out to me and really makes me wonder. The above quote was on many news sites, including here: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Douglas+Garland+charged+with+three+counts+murder+deaths+Nathan+Brien+grandparents/10030409/story.html

I think that the some employees (desk clerk, security, etc) at the hotel where Garland was staying were replaced with undercover detectives. I think that Garland was asked to leave the hotel late at night because they planned to arrest him, but they first wanted to see what he would do if he had the opportunity to sneak away.

 

[julydarling]

I think that the some employees (desk clerk, security, etc) at the hotel where Garland was staying were replaced with undercover detectives. I think that Garland was asked to leave the hotel late at night because they planned to arrest him, but they first wanted to see what he would do if he had the opportunity to sneak away.

Interesting thought! Would that not qualify as some kind of entrapment though?
To add to that thought - I wonder if they were monitoring wifi etc?
We never did hear about that "incident" at the hotel.. hmmm...

 

[otto]

Interesting thought! Would that not qualify as some kind of entrapment though?
To add to that thought - I wonder if they were monitoring wifi etc?
We never did hear about that "incident" at the hotel.. hmmm...

I don't think so.

Entrapment

"A defence of entrapment is available when:

1.the authorities provide a person with an opportunity to commit an offence without acting on a reasonable suspicion that this person is already engaged in criminal activity or pursuant to bona fide inquiries;
2.although having such a reasonable suspicion or acting in the course of a bona fide inquiry, they go beyond providing an opportunity and induce the commission of an offence.

"An exception to [the rule establishing entrapment] arises when the police undertake a bona fide investigation directed at an area where it is reasonably suspected that criminal activity is occurring. When such a location is defined with sufficient precision, the police may present any person associated with the area with the opportunity to commit the particular offence. Such randomness is permissible within the scope of a bona fide inquiry."

An undercover officer who attempts to buy drugs from someone suspected of selling drugs does not constitute entrapment.

A defence of entrapment cannot be advanced until after the crown has proven all of the elements of the offence."

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Law/Defences/Entrapment


"Douglas Garland was questioned in connection with the missing family in early July after being arrested on an unrelated charge.

He was re-arrested sometime Monday morning after he was asked to leave a local hotel. Garland had been staying at the hotel as part of bail conditions stemming from an unrelated charge."

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/man-to...ents-bodies-not-found-1.1913168#ixzz38Vghhrhr

 

[news.talk]

I think that the some employees (desk clerk, security, etc) at the hotel where Garland was staying were replaced with undercover detectives. I think that Garland was asked to leave the hotel late at night because they planned to arrest him, but they first wanted to see what he would do if he had the opportunity to sneak away.

It could be as simple as survey and report - DG was more than likely under surveillance from the first inkling of his involvement.

 

[Cattools]

I have spent a fair bit of time analyzing what we do and do not know about DG using the Hare Psychopathy Checklist. I am going to break my work into 2 posts because it is long. I, unconventionally, I am going to begin with my conclusions and the 2nd post will explain my thinking and give evidence.

I think we know that he is grandiose, a pathological lia and was living a parasitic lifestyle. I think he is a versatile criminal who (assuming guilt) lacks remorse and is callous. I also think he is capable of responsible behaviour for at least several years in a row.

I think he is not impulsive and does not take responsibility for his own behaviour.

We have no information on the following characteristics: glib and superficial charm, need for stimulation, conning and manipulative, shallow affect, marital and sexual relationships, early behaviour problems and juvenile delinquincy.

I used the descriptors at this site http://www.minddisorders.com/Flu-Inv/Hare-Psychopathy-Checklist.html

I will say that I was once trained to use the Hare Checklist to identify psychopaths in a criminal population, but that was a long time ago. I will also say that I may have missed some information and that this is MOO. I welcome discussion/correction.

After much consideration, I would like to move conning and manipulative into something that we do know about him. Several posts about that characteristic follow.

 

[Cherchri]

We can't actually say he's asexual either at this point. Not from what we know.

And I didn't say he is but rather seems to be. No known relationships of any kind.

 

[otto]

It could be as simple as survey and report - DG was more than likely under surveillance from the first inkling of his involvement.

Allen Liknes said that he knew Garland's vehicle well, and suggested that it was a piece of junk that could not do off road driving. If police first showed the photo to Allen Liknes, discovered that it belonged to Garland, then set up undercover surveillance, and then released the photo to the media ... that is certainly a possibility. That would be a good strategy to use when hoping that Garland would panic after seeing his truck in the news, and go to the location of the bodies to ensure that they were well hidden.

 

[bethmcneilly]

I think that the some employees (desk clerk, security, etc) at the hotel where Garland was staying were replaced with undercover detectives. I think that Garland was asked to leave the hotel late at night because they planned to arrest him, but they first wanted to see what he would do if he had the opportunity to sneak away.

Very interesting thought. So, you are thinking the "covert assets" could have been people that were working undercover that were an asset to the investigation? That never even crossed my mind. I was thinking that the "covert assets" were likely hidden money or property.

*Adding to clarify, it DID cross my mind that he would be under surveillance (I think he was) but it just had not occured to me that was what Hansen meant by "covert assets". If hidden money was found (such as in an account in another name or something) then it could have helped point investigators to something illegal going on. That's what I was thinking.

 

[news.talk]

And I didn't say he is but rather seems to be. No known relationships of any kind.

But soliciting prostitutes does not involve "relationships" - In fact, you unknowingly proved my point.

 

[news.talk]

Allen Liknes said that he knew Garland's vehicle well, and suggested that it was a piece of junk that could not do off road driving. If police first showed the photo to Allen Liknes, discovered that it belonged to Garland, then set up undercover surveillance, and then released the photo to the media ... that is certainly a possibility. That would be a good strategy to use when hoping that Garland would panic after seeing his truck in the news, and go to the location of the bodies to ensure that they were well hidden.

As a member of the media, I have often been used as a LE tool to further an investigation. I agree that there is most likely some of those methods at play here.

 

[Cherchri]

I think the word struggle came from when the cops were saying that the three did not leave on their own will. One time i think they said they did not leave without a struggle, not meaning there was a struggle meaning they did not leave willingly. IMO

Nope LE very specifically said a violent incident and I have no doubt those words were chosen with a great deal of forethought. I provided all the links further up the thread. It's the reporters who used words like grisly and struggle. It's important to get things right. Using different words have implications that then throw a different light on things and people go off at a tangent.

 

[otto]

As a member of the media, I have often been used as a LE tool to further an investigation. I agree that there is most likely some of those methods at play here.

Absolutely! Police/prosecutors will ask media to run a story to see if it generates leads, they will also provide incorrect information for the same reason. Their only objective is to solve the crime and they don't really care whether the public has some of the facts wrong at the time of the investigation.

 

[otto]

Nope LE very specifically said a violent incident and I have no doubt those words were chosen with a great deal of forethought. I provided all the links further up the thread. It's the reporters who used words like grisly and struggle. It's important to get things right. Using different words have implications that then throw a different light on things and people go off at a tangent.

What is a good interpretation for "violent incident" or "violent crime"? What could that mean?

I believe that the phrase "violent crime" has also been quoted in several articles, eg:

""We can now confirm a violent crime occurred in that residence," Andrus said of the home of Kathy and Alvin Liknes.

"I would say somebody would be in medical distress."

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2014/07/04/21784996.html

 

[Cherchri]

The suspect has not been convicted of a violent crime, but he is now charged with committing a violent crime - perhaps one of the most violent crimes in the city's history. Whatever happened in the Parkhill home involved violence; it was not a soft kill.

When Josh Lall stabbed his tenant, his two young daughters, his wife, and himself, police used the word "violence" in describing the scene.

"Yesterday, Insp. Slater refused comment on whether either a weapon or suicide note was found at the crime scene. The bodies showed "obvious signs of violence," he said, noting only that the scene was "gruesome" for first responders."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...her-in-grisly-calgary-killings/article673740/

The difference between this case, and that case, is that in this case police had to have hope that perhaps one of the three victims survived, so they did not describe the scene as "gruesome", but I suspect that it was.

I agree but was disagreeing with your statement "we know he is capable of violence". At this stage he is suspected to have murdered 3 people. Until his trial we do not "know".