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

[Hez]

Amber Tuccaro left this as a voice message on a friends phone and IIRC police state it was the last phone call ever made from her cell phone. She was engaged in high risk activity and was from out of town, but had previously lived in Edmonton. Amber, a friend and Amber's 1 yr old son, had checked into a motel in Nisku, AB... Amber left the motel to catch a ride to Edmonton - possibly to score drugs- and aside from this voice message, was never seen or heard from again.

IMO Amber was scared of the person she had hitched a ride from and so she discretely tried to call a friend, hoping to give enough details that the friend could alert police... Sadly, Amber's friend did not answer their phone and instead this cryptic voicemail was left ...

Here is a link for reference:

http://globalnews.ca/news/962931/rcmp-hope-new-billboard-will-help-solve-amber-tuccaro-cold-case/

Sorry for the o/t, but Amber Tuccaro's remains were found in September 2012, but no arrest has been made.

http://globalnews.ca/news/282771/remains-of-amber-alyssa-tuccaro-located/

 

[news.talk]

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.

It's actually more common than most people know. Sometimes the media are aware they are being used to further an investigation, but most times they are not. Often it is simple strategically placed word choices used in press releases. A good reporter will question everything, but a good reporter with common sense and decency, will not hinder an investigation by disclosing a possible LE tactic.

 

[Cattools]

My evidence/rationale:

Glib & Superficial Charm: No info
Grandiose: He took the government to court and believed he didn't need a lawyer. As it turns out, it seems he was right.
Need for stimulation: No info
Pathological Lying: living as someone else for several years (identity theft)
Conning and Manipulative: No definitive info, other than identify theft, with the exception that he may have conned a judge into believing he has ADD and was traumatized by accident that we aren't sure even happened
Lack of remorse or guilt: if we assume he is guilty then the murder of 3 people, particularly an innocent child, strongly suggests no remorse or guilty feelings about the damage done to the victim's family
Shallow Affect: No info
Callous and lacking empathy: As noted above if we assume he is guilty
Living a Parasitic Lifestyle: No definitive info, but it seems he was capable of holding down a job yet was apparently living off his parents. However, he may have had an agreement with his parents to provide work for rent. We don't really know.
Poor behavioural controls: Other than staying quiet for the few minutes on his perp walk, we don't really know Actually we do know that at least in the workplace he was able to control himself. We don't know if he was committing crimes while working in BC
Promiscuous Sexual Behaviour: No info
Early Behavioural Problems: No info--this is childhood stuff
Lack of Realistic Long Term Goals: For whatever reason he left university without a degree, and his meth making might have been motivated by the notion of "get rich quick". We don't really know about this.
Impulsivity: if we assume guilt and that the crime was premeditated then this is evidence against impulsivity
Failure to Accept Responsibility: living on the lam rather than facing consequences of his criminal behaviour
Many Short Term Marital Relationships: No info
Juvenile Delinquency: No info
Revocation of Conditional Release: he was arrested while breaking his bail conditions
Criminal Versatility: true if we consider his charges and convictions and assume guilt on these murders

I may be contradicting myself. Please forgive me if I have. I am open to the idea that I have missed info, misinterpreted info or made other mistakes. I simply thought this might be helpful with respect to separating what we know about DG from what we are assuming or don't know about him.

 

[news.talk]

My evidence/rationale:

Glib & Superficial Charm: No info
Grandiose: He took the government to court and believed he didn't need a lawyer. As it turns out, it seems he was right.
Need for stimulation: No info
Pathological Lying: living as someone else for several years (identity theft)
Conning and Manipulative: No definitive info, other than identify theft, with the exception that he may have conned a judge into believing he has ADD and was traumatized by accident that we aren't sure even happened
Lack of remorse or guilt: if we assume he is guilty then the murder of 3 people, particularly an innocent child, strongly suggests no remorse or guilty feelings about the damage done to the victim's family
Shallow Affect: No info
Callous and lacking empathy: As noted above if we assume he is guilty
Living a Parasitic Lifestyle: No definitive info, but it seems he was capable of holding down a job yet was apparently living off his parents. However, he may have had an agreement with his parents to provide work for rent. We don't really know.
Poor behavioural controls: Other than staying quiet for the few minutes on his perp walk, we don't really know
Promiscuous Sexual Behaviour: No info
Early Behavioural Problems: No info--this is childhood stuff
Lack of Realistic Long Term Goals: For whatever reason he left university without a degree, and his meth making might have been motivated by the notion of "get rich quick". We don't really know about this.
Impulsivity: if we assume guilt and that the crime was premeditated then this is evidence against impulsivity
Failure to Accept Responsibility: living on the lam rather than facing consequences of his criminal behaviour
Many Short Term Marital Relationships: No info
Juvenile Delinquency: No info
Revocation of Conditional Release: he was arrested while breaking his bail conditions
Criminal Versatility: true if we consider his charges and convictions and assume guilt on these murders

I may be contradicting myself. Please forgive me if I have. I am open to the idea that I have missed info, misinterpreted info or made other mistakes. I simply thought this might be helpful with respect to separating what we know about DG from what we are assuming or don't know about him.

Re: "Need for stimulation" - Meth is a stimulant and would certainly qualify if he also was a user, which we don't know.

ETA: He may still fit your quotes criteria for 'Impulsively' - Pre-meditation does not necessarily mean long term planning - it could be as simple as bringing a weapon and/or circling the neighbourhood that evening.

 

[Cattools]

Re: "Need for stimulation" - Meth is a stimulant and would certainly qualify if he also was a user, which we don't know.

Agreed, it would, but we don't know. Also need for stimulation could be shown through risk-taking behaviour patterns, perhaps we can accept his criminal past as evidence of that.

 

[Cattools]

Re: "Need for stimulation" - Meth is a stimulant and would certainly qualify if he also was a user, which we don't know.

ETA: He may still fit your quotes criteria for 'Impulsively' - Pre-meditation does not necessarily mean long term planning - it could be as simple as bringing a weapon and/or circling the neighbourhood that evening.

You may be right, but I think the criterion requires a sustained pattern (may be contradicting myself here) of impulsive behaviour. We do know that LE does not consider the crime to be driven by impulsivity. At least, I think we do.

 

[Cherchri]

I wouldn't be too convinced of that. Homicide investigators can probably do their jobs without looking to crime forum discussions to get ideas. I know that in some cases in the US, police and defence lawyers look at crime forum discussion, but I think the opinion in a place like Calgary might be along the lines of thinking that if police need to read a forum to get ideas after an arrest has been made, then maybe they should look for another job.

LE admit to having a team that triages several forums Otto. Just reread the Calgary Herald article interviewing you among others .... It's on the second page of the article on Armchair Detectives.

 

[news.talk]

You may be right, but I think the criterion requires a sustained pattern (may be contradicting myself here) of impulsive behaviour. We do know that LE does not consider the crime to be driven by impulsivity. At least, I think we do.

Makes sense. I do think the murder of NO was highly impulsive.

 

[otto]

You may be right, but I think the criterion requires a sustained pattern (may be contradicting myself here) of impulsive behaviour. We do know that LE does not consider the crime to be driven by impulsivity. At least, I think we do.

Although he had been convicted for using false identification, how would we interpret the fact that he either replaced that identification after jail time, or secretly kept a second copy of the identification, and that he was carrying that false identification when he knew that police were looking to speak with him about a triple murder? There is something wrong with that picture, especially if we are to believe that the suspect is an intelligent man.

 

[otto]

LE admit to having a team that triages several forums Otto. Just reread the Calgary Herald article interviewing you among others .... It's on the second page of the article on Armchair Detectives.

I was not interviewed for that article. Those were merely comments and observations made by a newspaper reporter.

I did find the article, and this is what police said about forums:

"Calgary police won’t comment on ongoing investigations, but said online forums in general are a mixed blessing.“

Anytime we have a significant investigation, we know that it will spark online conversations and commentary,” said Const. Jeremy Shaw. “We have to provide significant resources to triage each of these tips and conversations, and ensure that we look into the merits of each one individually.”

Almost all forum dwellers are supportive of the police. One member of the private Facebook group even approached the lead investigator of the O’Brien case, who said he appreciated people’s interest but advised against contributing evidence or joining in search operations to avoid compromising the investigation.

“In some cases when we receive an abundance of ‘forum-dweller’ theories and tips, it makes it difficult to spot the valuable information as the good tips get so diluted among the junk,” Const. Shaw said. Herald reporters have also received well over a dozen theories and possible leads of varying quality.

For Const. Shaw, it’s important forum users be mindful of the danger of misinformation spreading online, citing the Boston case."

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/a...issing+persons+case+forum/10026298/story.html

 

[Cattools]

Makes sense. I do think the murder of NO was highly impulsive.

I think the murder of NO also shows callous disregard, lack of empathy and perhaps impulsivity but I think I might describe it more as driven by panic about something he did not foresee happening.

 

[news.talk]

Although he had been convicted for using false identification, how would we interpret the fact that he either replaced that identification after jail time, or secretly kept a second copy of the identification, and that he was carrying that false identification when he knew that police were looking to speak with him about a triple murder? There is something wrong with that picture, especially if we are to believe that the suspect is an intelligent man.

My guess would be that he has an inflated sense of his own intelligence and views LE as lower intellectuals.

 

[Cattools]

Although he had been convicted for using false identification, how would we interpret the fact that he either replaced that identification after jail time, or secretly kept a second copy of the identification, and that he was carrying that false identification when he knew that police were looking to speak with him about a triple murder? There is something wrong with that picture, especially if we are to believe that the suspect is an intelligent man.

I think that might show more conning and manipulative behaviour, rather than impulsive behaviour.

 

[Cattools]

My guess would be that he has an inflated sense of his own intelligence and views LE as lower intellectuals.

And even judges. Lots of evidence of grandiosity I think, or over-inflated self worth.

Don't know, but grandiosity might play a role in his desire for recognition on the patent.

 

[otto]

Carrying a second set of false ID at a time that he knew police were looking for his truck could be related to "grandiose", but I think there's something else going on too. Did he think that if police questioned him, he could present false identification, they'd thank him for his time, and look elsewhere for "Douglas Garland"? Was it an impulsive act to place the false ID in his wallet, or did he normally carry false identification and simply forget to remove it? It seems to me that after seeing his truck on the news, he should have done everything possible to distance himself from criminal activity, but he didn't.

 

[goodasgold]

Although he had been convicted for using false identification, how would we interpret the fact that he either replaced that identification after jail time, or secretly kept a second copy of the identification, and that he was carrying that false identification when he knew that police were looking to speak with him about a triple murder? There is something wrong with that picture, especially if we are to believe that the suspect is an intelligent man.

You see that is the thing. Something does not add up with DG doing this crime. We are talking about a man that "got away for 7 years from the law" using a child's false identity, not to mention got a job and even applied for EI to escape drug trafficking charges. He is used to not getting caught and doing it in a very smart way. Now this same man, drove a truck several times by a house he is suspected of murdering three people, not fleeing this time and leaving that truck that could have been witnessed right outside on the acreage, even after the news had people searching for it. And caught with the same ID he hid for 7 years with and did time for. There is a bigger picture here that we are being kept in the dark about. JMO

 

[Cattools]

Carrying a second set of false ID at a time that he knew police were looking for his truck could be related to "grandiose", but I think there's something else going on too. Did he think that if police questioned him, he could present false identification, they'd thank him for his time, and look elsewhere for "Douglas Garland"? Was it an impulsive act to place the false ID in his wallet, or did he normally carry false identification and simply forget to remove it? It seems to me that after seeing his truck on the news, he should have done everything possible to distance himself from criminal activity, but he didn't.

Yes, I think grandiose in the sense that he might have thought he could fool LE, and again, perhaps conning and manipulative, as though he could manipulate LE into thinking he was someone else. I didn't realize he was carrying someone else's ID. I thought it was found at his home. Regardless, it does seem he was trying to con someone into thinking he was someone else.

And part of that con might have been acting as though he was innnocent re:goodasgold's comments

 

[Cattools]

Although he had been convicted for using false identification, how would we interpret the fact that he either replaced that identification after jail time, or secretly kept a second copy of the identification, and that he was carrying that false identification when he knew that police were looking to speak with him about a triple murder? There is something wrong with that picture, especially if we are to believe that the suspect is an intelligent man.

We might be being conned into thinking he is intelligent. Do we really have proof of that, or is that a descriptor that got applied to him without evidence?. He didn't get his degree perhaps because he was kicked out for cheating. This could be suggestive of being less intelligent than we think he is. Also, conning and manipulative can present as a kind of intelligence.

 

[news.talk]

And even judges. Lots of evidence of grandiosity I think, or over-inflated self worth.

Don't know, but grandiosity might play a role in his desire for recognition on the patent.

I would be interested in knowing if there is a link between people who represent themselves in court for *serious* offenses and people that have been determined to be psychopaths.

 

[ResearchQuest]

Airdrie community reacts to triple homocide

http://www.airdrieecho.com/2014/07/24/community-reacts-to-triple-homicide