Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #18

[kaley]

Hi Kaley, We recently re-hashed some of the AA info. You can refer to Thread 17 around page 19. I'm sure there was more but that is all I have handy for now.

Here is the link. I posted a comment #450ish. Page 19.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...June-2014-*ARREST*-17&p=11059887#post11059887

Thanks. I wasn't looking for the actual Amber Alert info exactly. I remember reading an article about how this was not a typical amber alert and I am trying to find it now. I want to know what about this amber alert was not typical. I don't think it was the time frame. I thought there was more to it.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

ITA - the covert assets makes one wonder - hotel staff, taxi cab driver, hotel 'guests', etc.

Here is the paragraph Cherchri wanted shared in regards to the 'covert assets' quote:

"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. (BBM)

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/0...arged-with-murders-of-missing-calgary-family/

Undercover officers maybe?

 

[LoriMcA]

Thanks. I wasn't looking for the actual Amber Alert info exactly. I remember reading an article about how this was not a typical amber alert and I am trying to find it now. I want to know what about this amber alert was not typical. I don't think it was the time frame. I thought there was more to it.

You're right kaley...there was more to it...

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/calgar...did-not-leave-on-their-own-volition-1.1894229

"Police initially opted not to issue an Amber Alert because they did not have a description of a suspected abductor or a vehicle, Brookwell said. But they went ahead with the alert later, despite the missing criteria."

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Yes, why is an intriguing question for sure. I wonder if DG was 'playing dumb' in regards to pretending to not understanding his bail conditions? Kind of like his 'I can't see without my glasses' charade in court. Sorry to sound jaded, but I found his comment about glasses in court a bit of a disrespectful comment towards events happening, almost like he thought it amusing. Most people in that circumstance wouldn't be worried about their glasses! Oops, OT....

A covert orchestration of events could have happened too at the motel. Very likely. I have to say, it takes a lot to get kicked out of a hotel room, what did he do?

I remember in my youth, we would rent hotel rooms for drinking parties with the bands or after someone's wedding and got loud/obnoxious, and STILL not kicked out. Strange, that a quiet guy like DG would be asked to leave....

I wonder if there was a physical altercation of sort that was diffused, so not enough for any charges to anyone? Maybe someone snickered a snide remark to him, and he uttered a threat or something happened along those lines....

DG was no doubt exhausted, anxious and confused and not able to comprehend/process the instructions. The comment about his glasses is very common and one people even mutter to themselves daily. I don't know if it was rude. Could have just been a habitual comment. It is a common one. JMO

 

[LoriMcA]

IMO LE were at/near the motel and knew exactly where he would go. It is even possible this situation was orchestrated. DG was desperate to get back to the acreage. The WHY is the question begging. Was he simply sitting on the porch or had he done what he so badly wanted to do and was he observed and only arrested thereafter? Those are lingering questions for me. Awesome map - thank you!

MSM certainly gave very different accounts of where he was re-arrested:
Garland was re-arrested very early Monday in a field not far from the Airdrie property owned by his parents where police spent days searching for clues about the missing family. He had been staying at a local hotel as part of his bail conditions stemming from the unrelated charge, but had been asked to leave.


Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/dougla...issing-calgary-family-1.1914262#ixzz3GnBXL3f0

Oh, I don't doubt for a second they were keeping a VERY close eye on him...
Orchestration though....can they do something to make someone break their conditions/break the law...purposely?
I can understand watching him like a hawk...following him...making sure he's where he is supposed to be during his curfew hours, etc... I just don't know if that is something they are allowed to do?

Why is definitely the question...sometimes I feel like this case is going to surprise us all in how simple it may be...some little thing that we've all looked at this whole time and when the evidence comes out eventually we're all going to be on here and it's going to be AHA!!! YKWIM?

I remember the different stories about 'where' he was picked up....in a field...on the porch...on a neighbours porch....another early on thought it was at the hotel.....yikes...

 

[Sillybilly]

You're right kaley...there was more to it...

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/calgar...did-not-leave-on-their-own-volition-1.1894229

"Police initially opted not to issue an Amber Alert because they did not have a description of a suspected abductor or a vehicle, Brookwell said. But they went ahead with the alert later, despite the missing criteria."

Pretty sure it would have been due to "there is reason to believe the victim is in danger of serious harm or death" (based on LE's knowledge of the crime scene and their belief that someone was in medical distress).

 

[Lalalacasbah]

DG was no doubt exhausted, anxious and confused and not able to comprehend/process the instructions. The comment about his glasses is very common and one people even mutter to themselves daily. I don't know if it was rude. Could have just been a habitual comment. It is a common one. JMO

Tink, you're much kinder than I I guess I have low tolerance for behaviors! I'm sure the search parties, LE, NO's parents and all the family involved were just as exhausted and deprived of their usual thinking but they didn't seem to show.

I guess I feel if I was before a judge and courts and possibly being analyzed for my every move, my ears would be perked up and I'd be listening intently to what was happening.

I got the impression he seemed to be distracting things with the glasses comment, maybe to garner sympathy and draw attention to himself and not the serious matter at hand, but that's just my jaded take on it...

 

[Cherchri]

Undercover officers maybe?

I may be quite wrong but I thought Hanson said they had covert assets at the Airdrie motel - in answer to a reporter's question. In my mind they set up his eviction from the motel then tailed him. I could be completely wrong but for some reason I have been hanging onto that forever. For me, that had to happen for him to be re-arrested and charged with murder. It will be interesting to see if I can unearth anything further on that....... Back soon.

 

[Cherchri]

Tink, you're much kinder than I I guess I have low tolerance for behaviors! I'm sure the search parties, LE, NO's parents and all the family involved were just as exhausted and deprived of their usual thinking but they didn't seem to show.

I guess I feel if I was before a judge and courts and possibly being analyzed for my every move, my ears would be perked up and I'd be listening intently to what was happening.

I got the impression he seemed to be distracting things with the glasses comment, maybe to garner sympathy and draw attention to himself and not the serious matter at hand, but that's just my jaded take on it...

With ref to the glasses issue. What he actually said was "bad eyesight" just those two words and it was in response to the judge querying why he was leaning into the CCTV camera. Prisoners are supposed to stand against the back wall of the CCTV room and DG was moving toward the camera at the front of the cubicle because he literally couldn't see the judge, the courtroom, etc from that distance. The next time we saw him he had some snazzy new specs.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/07/09/douglas-garland_n_5571677.html

 

[news.talk]

I may be quite wrong but I thought Hanson said they had covert assets at the Airdrie motel - in answer to a reporter's question. In my mind they set up his eviction from the motel then tailed him. I could be completely wrong but for some reason I have been hanging onto that forever. For me, that had to happen for him to be re-arrested and charged with murder. It will be interesting to see if I can unearth anything further on that....... Back soon.

I agree. I am of the belief that allowing him easy access to bail on the initial charge was deliberate and the entire time he was out on bail, he was *very* carefully monitored to see if he would lead them to the remains.

 

[Cherchri]

I agree. I am of the belief that allowing him easy access to bail on the initial charge was deliberate and the entire time he was out on bail, he was *very* carefully monitored to see if he would lead them to the remains.

You have Perfect timing as always! This is the snippet that got me thinking that way.......
http://live.calgaryherald.com/Event...or_Nathan_OBrien_and_his_grandparents?Page=19

Officers arrested Garland again near his parents' Airdrie property at about 1:30 a.m. Monday.

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. BBM

 

[Sillybilly]

I may be quite wrong but I thought Hanson said they had covert assets at the Airdrie motel - in answer to a reporter's question. In my mind they set up his eviction from the motel then tailed him. I could be completely wrong but for some reason I have been hanging onto that forever. For me, that had to happen for him to be re-arrested and charged with murder. It will be interesting to see if I can unearth anything further on that....... Back soon.

But why not charge him with murder in the first place rather than taking such a roundabout? Unless they didn't have enough evidence at the time of the first arrest/charge/bail but were quickly able to find something else to support the murder charge.

If covert assets were involved, it will be interesting to know the details of how that all came down. If there was entrapment, hopefully it would be ruled that the probative value of any such action outweighed the prejudicial value (or whatever legal wranglings/terms the court could find that justified it).

 

[Krystine]

It is an interesting hole in the timeline of DG. I assume he was being followed or tracked by LE and arrested at the moment there was a potential risk of civillian safety, i.e. being on the neighbors porch.
I am starting to think he took a cab or some other person drove him. He may have been dropped off close to the residence and was trying to take the back way in. He must have known he would be caught. Yet, he could have been so panicked and did not think it through. It is a sure good thing he was not shot at and killed.

He probably had his own DL. The truck was most likely seized. That seems like a long walk on foot. I am surprised he wasn't apprehended immediately after leaving the hotel.

If he did get there on foot, through fields or even back roads, he would have been covered in mosquito bites. I recall thinking that as we watched the 'perp walk.' A taxi would make sense but wouldn't a seasoned bad guy suspect that LE would be monitoring him while out on bail?

 

[Cherchri]

But why not charge him with murder in the first place rather than taking such a roundabout? Unless they didn't have enough evidence at the time of the first arrest/charge/bail but were quickly able to find something else to support the murder charge.

If covert assets were involved, it will be interesting to know the details of how that all came down. If there was entrapment, hopefully it would be ruled that the probative value of any such action outweighed the prejudicial value (or whatever legal wranglings/terms the court could find that justified it).

My thinking is that he possibly retrieved something on that walk or checked on something which was witnessed by the covert assets. I just don't know but as I said I got stuck on that line of thought ages ago. Whatever the case, I think something significant enough happened along with him breaking curfew. It will certainly be interesting to hear how it all went down.

 

[news.talk]

But why not charge him with murder in the first place rather than taking such a roundabout? Unless they didn't have enough evidence at the time of the first arrest/charge/bail but were quickly able to find something else to support the murder charge.

If covert assets were involved, it will be interesting to know the details of how that all came down. If there was entrapment, hopefully it would be ruled that the probative value of any such action outweighed the prejudicial value (or whatever legal wranglings/terms the court could find that justified it).

It would be my guess, that at the time of the initial arrest, the forensic results were not concluded. They stated that there was significant evidence to process and I can only imagine that they wanted all their ducks in a row before filing homicide charges.

It is also possible, that they were hoping that DG would lead them to the remains. Given the weight of forensic evidence that a body holds, a closely monitored surveillance was worth the risk.

 

[Krystine]

Okay....made a little map....
View attachment 61832

Firstly, I've always wondered what he did at the motel to be asked to leave...
I read it that he was found on the deck/porch of his own house...from the article I'm posting below...the grammar is terrible...it could be read different ways....
I've also wondered ...if he got kicked out of the motel...middle of the night *midnight or so?* ...why he didn't call his lawyer...explain the situation and a 'what do I do now?' scenario...
He had to know if he left the motel he'd be re-arrested...OR...did he have an escape plan...After all...he got away with 'escape' in 1992...at least for a few years right?
Remember when he was getting his release...IIRC...he asked if he could stay at the acreage....as if he didn't know he could not....it was ...weird....
Lastly and giving DG the benefit of the doubt....a BIG benefit of the doubt....maybe he panicked when he was kicked out of the motel *for whatever reason*...and sought out the only refuge/safe haven *to him at least*...that he knew of......home.

BTW...he was travelling on foot...and he did go cross-country according to quite a few articles but this one in particular:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...le-with-grim-puzzle/article19682368/?page=all

"The quiet street was awash with flashing lights that night as neighbours said Mr. Garland crossed two open fields and was arrested on the porch of the home behind his family’s property."

If you look at the above map...or even the online Google maps....there isn't a home 'behind' their property.
JMOO

I agree with Lori, he was arrested on the back deck of the Garland home. IMO it should be compulsory for journalists to pass English 101

 

[Lalalacasbah]

With ref to the glasses issue. What he actually said was "bad eyesight" just those two words and it was in response to the judge querying why he was leaning into the CCTV camera. Prisoners are supposed to stand against the back wall of the CCTV room and DG was moving toward the camera at the front of the cubicle because he literally couldn't see the judge, the courtroom, etc from that distance. The next time we saw him he had some snazzy new specs.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/07/09/douglas-garland_n_5571677.html

I definitely misinterpreted the glasses situation. I guess I am pretty jaded!

 

[Slebby]

My thinking is that he possibly retrieved something on that walk or checked on something which was witnessed by the covert assets. I just don't know but as I said I got stuck on that line of thought ages ago. Whatever the case, I think something significant enough happened along with him breaking curfew. It will certainly be interesting to hear how it all went down.

I agree, I think something significant happened that was enough for LE to swoop in and make the arrest. I have wondered, maybe he had stashed something at his neighbors, perhaps under their porch. I have wondered that maybe he had taken the estate sale proceeds from the L home, and had it stashed nearby. You know, close enough to have quick access to it, but not so close that LE would find it if they searched the G property. Why else would he return to the acreage? A nice wad of cash stashed away might have been strong motivation - to grab the cash to fund a clean getaway to a new life. Instead, LE nabbed him, and perhaps caught him red-handed with money stolen from the Ls.

Just an idea...

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I agree, I think something significant happened that was enough for LE to swoop in and make the arrest. I have wondered, maybe he had stashed something at his neighbors, perhaps under their porch. I have wondered that maybe he had taken the estate sale proceeds from the L home, and had it stashed nearby. You know, close enough to have quick access to it, but not so close that LE would find it if they searched the G property. Why else would he return to the acreage? A nice wad of cash stashed away might have been strong motivation - to grab the cash to fund a clean getaway to a new life. Instead, LE nabbed him, and perhaps caught him red-handed with money stolen from the Ls.

Just an idea...

That's a good idea, haven't heard it before. Could very well have been the cash from the sale.

 

[Cherchri]

I agree with Lori, he was arrested on the back deck of the Garland home. IMO it should be compulsory for journalists to pass English 101

I actually loved the cadence of that article and I think it was rather beautifully written. I think the ambiguity may have been intentional as I don't believe LE ever specified exactly where he was apprehended. Not a wise choice but understandable. I have never read anything else by this writer but there were certainly a few beautifully written paragraphs.

"Surrounded by large yellow fields of fragrant canola and patches of swaying green wheat, the faded sign at the end of Range Road 291 reads “Rural Crime Watch Area.”

To long-time residents, the sign always seemed out of place on this farming road in southern Alberta, at the edge of the quiet bedroom community of Airdrie. Everyone on Range Road 291 knows each other and helps each other. This is an area ruled by tradition and hard work, where neighbours share coffee over well-worn kitchen tables. Descendants of the five families that first settled the area a century ago still meet at Christmas annually.

Near the edge of the road, where asphalt gives way to gravel that continues to the horizon, Archie and Doreen Garland have owned a large acreage for more than 40 years. A tree-lined lane runs to their home from the road, with rusted and sagging barbed wire strung across the front of their property. This has been home to their family for decades."

Given the subject matter, I find that just a lovely window into a world that has been shattered for these old folk.