I suppose that would confirm that the victim had some questionable business dealings, but I think that is already known.
"The
entrepreneur can be linked to almost a dozen companies in the oil-and-gas and construction sectors over the past 20 years. Some of them focused on his patents; others on volatile resource plays in remote Northern Alberta."
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/0...glas-garland-over-patent-calgary-family-says/
We know from the police investigation that the evidence did not lead to a suspect that had questionable business dealings. The evidence led to an Airdrie acreage where one of the people that lived on that acreage was seen in the Parkhill neighbourhood several times on the night of the murder. There are two crime scenes: the Parkhill home, and the Airdrie acreage. Only after police followed the evidence and made an arrest was it possible to offer conjecture as to motive based on the fact that the accused had both a personal and business relationship with one of the victims.
It strikes me as going about in a backwards direction to accept that the accused could have a motive based on a prior relationship with the victim, therefore everyone that had a prior business relationship with the victim could be a suspect, or that everyone that had a relationship with accused could be a suspect. I still don't really understand the reasoning behind setting aside all known evidence, and pursuing business associates of the victim and accused, as the evidence did not lead to a business relationship, it led to a truck that connected the two crime scenes.