Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #22

[Lalalacasbah]

I can definitely see DG burning his clothes, just really curious where the other belt buckles came from. Perhaps it's just a mistweet and only one buckle was found in the debris. The microchips have me wondering where they came from as well. Some kind of electronics?

Maybe belt buckles were used as a form of restraints somehow?

Wonder if it was actual microchips or sim cards or what…computers/laptops use memory or RAM chips, digital cameras, some cell phones. Wasn't there an HP cord found at the Liknes home that didn't match any devices? Maybe a laptop of theirs was taken, then burned?

 

[garbagetweet]

I *think* I read that there were two cars in the garage already. I'll have to go back and look for that, but yes, definitely would be easier! I remember early on we also speculated that he parked in the alley at the back of the house. I can't remember where we landed on that....

Two cars were found in the garage but that would be in reference to the rear double garage I believe. The house looks to have a single front garage and a double garage in the rear that was probably added later on.

 

[otto]

One question I have is when they said that they found bone and "what they thought to be a tooth" does that mean it wasn't actually a tooth? Maybe I am reading to much into it but I have reread different tweets and none say bone and a tooth. It's all worded like they had thought it was a tooth in past tense...

They probably had to do an analysis of the 'tooth', and we'll probably hear more about it later.

 

[gen_bug]

There were questions of witnesses, perhaps Jennifer (anyone remember), about whether either of the adults wore diapers. Apparently there's something on Garland's hard drive related to women wearing adult diapers. We need more information to understand where the prosecution is going with that line of thought.

Valerie Fortney ‏@ValFortney 3m3 minutes ago
"Did they wear adult diapers?" Crown asks Jennifer of her parents. #garland


Lucie Edwardson ‏@MetroLucie 37s38 seconds ago
Parker asked if there was any reason for his father to wear adult diapers, which Allen replies no to. #Garland #yyc

Valerie Fortney ‏@ValFortney 1m1 minute ago
Doreen #Garland is asked, "Do you know if Douglas was incontinent?" she says she wasn't aware.

 

[Sprigs]

I agree with some of your earlier comments Otto - just realized it didn't hit reply so it's not connected to your comments about WHY he did was he did.

Looking at his past, in his youth he had a meth/drug lab at his parents place. And then 30 some years later appears to have murdered, dismembered and tortured three people there. It's like because he's a loner he somehow thinks he's invisible? His home is a safe place to him? I mean when the police alert about the truck came out - he didn't run, he even continued driving the truck??

And fighting Service Canada for his employment insurance benefits. The judge sided with his case - he DID do the work, his employer DID pay the insurance premiums, BUT it was in an assumed name as he was a fugitive from justice at the time!! And he was working at a lab with false credentials. It's like his moral compass is totally skewed but to him it makes sense.

I can't believe I just googled diaper fetish. Wikipedia entry states "Being forced to wear diapers as a form of humiliation is sometimes a behavior encountered in sexual masochism". I lean towards him having a thing for KL and her obviously not reciprocating. I think the goal was to punish AL and perhaps offer himself as a replacement to KL. NO was unexpected.

I think the Calgary police/Crown have a really tight case. I think they have so much to prove their case. Kim Ross, DG's lawyer has stated they aren't even sure if they will present ANY evidence. They will wait to the close of the Crown's evidence. The defense I believe is ensuring their client receives a fair trial but ultimately I believe DG is going to be convicted. He better be.

I have a 5 year old boy and another young son. I cannot under ANY circumstances understand the taking of a child's life. And on some level I hope DG gets that. Whatever his reasoning for going after AL and even KL was, when he encountered NO that night and still went forward with whatever messed retribution he'd planned he crossed a line there is no coming back from.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

There were questions of witnesses, perhaps Jennifer (anyone remember), about whether either of the adults wore diapers. Apparently there's something on Garland's hard drive related to women wearing adult diapers. We need more information to understand where the prosecution is going with that line of thought.

I think Garland was sexually aroused at the thought of women being restrained while wearing diapers. Restrained, I'm thinking being against their will. There's so much smut on the internet now, I'm sure there's 'tame' photos of this scenario out there and then the really dark, hardcore, sick, torture ones. I have to think DG veered towards the sick/torture ones considering his other internet searches. I think this crime was partially for sexual stimulation as much as revenge.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I agree with some of your earlier comments Otto - just realized it didn't hit reply so it's not connected to your comments about WHY he did was he did.

Looking at his past, in his youth he had a meth/drug lab at his parents place. And then 30 some years later appears to have murdered, dismembered and tortured three people there. It's like because he's a loner he somehow thinks he's invisible? His home is a safe place to him? I mean when the police alert about the truck came out - he didn't run, he even continued driving the truck??

And fighting Service Canada for his employment insurance benefits. The judge sided with his case - he DID do the work, his employer DID pay the insurance premiums, BUT it was in an assumed name as he was a fugitive from justice at the time!! And he was working at a lab with false credentials. It's like his moral compass is totally skewed but to him it makes sense.

I can't believe I just googled diaper fetish. Wikipedia entry states "Being forced to wear diapers as a form of humiliation is sometimes a behavior encountered in sexual masochism". I lean towards him having a thing for KL and her obviously not reciprocating. I think the goal was to punish AL and perhaps offer himself as a replacement to KL. NO was unexpected.

I think the Calgary police/Crown have a really tight case. I think they have so much to prove their case. Kim Ross, DG's lawyer has stated they aren't even sure if they will present ANY evidence. They will wait to the close of the Crown's evidence. The defense I believe is ensuring their client receives a fair trial but ultimately I believe DG is going to be convicted. He better be.

I have a 5 year old boy and another young son. I cannot under ANY circumstances understand the taking of a child's life. And on some level I hope DG gets that. Whatever his reasoning for going after AL and even KL was, when he encountered NO that night and still went forward with whatever messed retribution he'd planned he crossed a line there is no coming back from.

I agree. I think he could do ALL the things he fantasized and planned with this crime - revenge, sexual arousal (getting off by it all), humiliation, explore his interest in autopsies/human anatomy and disposal done in a couple different ways (hopefully we don't hear about more than the barrel and wood chipper).

 

[Dodes]

There were questions of witnesses, perhaps Jennifer (anyone remember), about whether either of the adults wore diapers. Apparently there's something on Garland's hard drive related to women wearing adult diapers. We need more information to understand where the prosecution is going with that line of thought.

I've been following along since the beginning of the trial but finally took the plunge and registered. First of all, thank you to everyone who has been posting tweets. It's really helpful to read them all in one place.

Regarding the adult diapers, I'm wondering if the aerial pics showed the bodies of AL and KL wearing what appear to be diapers? I seem to recall reading that the bodies were seen without shirts and pants but no mention of undergarments. It seems like if the bodies were nude there would be some mention of that as opposed to the specific wording of "shirts and pants". That always seemed a bit odd to me.

 

[Dodes]

Found the quote:

“Alvin and Kathy lying prone, face down on the grass at the Garland farm with no shirt on and no pants on,” Faulkner told the jury. “You will also see a small figure curled up on the grass.”

Source: http://globalnews.ca/news/3172718/high-profile-triple-murder-trial-to-begin-for-douglas-garland-accused-in-nathan-obrien-case/

 

[sublimemumma]

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/5548518

In this amber alert it states that Nathan was last seen in peach coloured shorts and a blue hoodie.

I was curious as to what the amber alert said he was wearing.

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

This one states the same. I don't understand why JO talked about the pink pj he was wearing

 

[Power of Two]

I've been following along since the beginning of the trial but finally took the plunge and registered. First of all, thank you to everyone who has been posting tweets. It's really helpful to read them all in one place.

Regarding the adult diapers, I'm wondering if the aerial pics showed the bodies of AL and KL wearing what appear to be diapers? I seem to recall reading that the bodies were seen without shirts and pants but no mention of undergarments. It seems like if the bodies were nude there would be some mention of that as opposed to the specific wording of "shirts and pants". That always seemed a bit odd to me.

Another train of thought to ponder....When people decease, their bladders and bowels may evacuate. Perhaps DG did not want to have to deal with body waste after the fact?

 

[casesensitive]

We really don't know the significance of the small green sweater yet. At this point it is only an observation noted by Scully's handler. Scully wasn't allowed to enter the room due to toxic hazards, so we know he didn't have the chance to zero in on anything in the room. We will find out if the green sweater is relevant, or if Scully "sat" for something else. Of course JO could put this to bed by recognizing the sweater as one of Nathan's. And if not, DNA analysis might provide evidence.

 

[Sillybilly]

Reminder that all pics need links. Also, other than a minor victim, we do not post pics with minors in them.

:wave:

 

[deugirtni]

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/5548518

In this amber alert it states that Nathan was last seen in peach coloured shorts and a blue hoodie.

I was curious as to what the amber alert said he was wearing.

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

This one states the same. I don't understand why JO talked about the pink pj he was wearing

Wondering if the clothing NO had been wearing that day (peach shorts/blue hoodie) was not found in the L home, and was therefore speculated to have been worn again when he 'left the home'? Also, the pink PJs that JO said NO had worn that night.. at least one part of those appears to be seen in a crimescene photo (below) taken beside the pull-out bed where JO had last known her mother and son to be sleeping before she left the residence around 11pm.

Crimescene photo presented at trial as shown by many of the reporters present.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2eJhudVIAEpsFq.jpg:large

 

[deugirtni]

Valerie Fortney ‏@ValFortney 3m3 minutes ago
"Did they wear adult diapers?" Crown asks Jennifer of her parents. #garland


Lucie Edwardson ‏@MetroLucie 37s38 seconds ago
Parker asked if there was any reason for his father to wear adult diapers, which Allen replies no to. #Garland#yyc

Valerie Fortney ‏@ValFortney 1m1 minute ago
Doreen #Garland is asked, "Do you know if Douglas was incontinent?" she says she wasn't aware.

Interesting that DG's mother has the sense to know that she may or may not know all of the private and personal details of her son's ability or inability to control his bladder, even though she resides with him in the same house, but yet AL and JO each stated unequivocally that their respective parents didn't wear adult diapers, even though neither of the two lived with their parents. Such personal details may or may not be shared or openly displayed to family members, so one never really knows (unless they have seen evidence of people actually wearing them).

 

[mrazda71]

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/5548518

In this amber alert it states that Nathan was last seen in peach coloured shorts and a blue hoodie.

I was curious as to what the amber alert said he was wearing.

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

THIS ONE STATES THE SAME. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY JO TALKED ABOUT THE PINK PJ HE WAS WEARING

The last time Jen saw her son alive, he was wearing the pink pyjamas. That's why it was mentioned. A, it was factual witness account and B, it was a sweet, funny moment that they shared ...

 

[ABro]

Interesting that DG's mother has the sense to know that she may or may not know all of the private and personal details of her son's ability or inability to control his bladder, even though she resides with him in the same house, but yet AL and JO each stated unequivocally that their respective parents didn't wear adult diapers, even though neither of the two lived with their parents. Such personal details may or may not be shared or openly displayed to family members, so one never really knows (unless they have seen evidence of people actually wearing them).

Considering that DG's mother didn't know he was burning bodies in the backyard, I doubt she's the most observant person on the face of the earth. I don't think it has much to do with "sense" or lack of it. Everyone testified to what they knew as they were asked to do.

 

[Coldpizza]

Douglas Garland triple-murder trial to hear details of forensic exam of farm
January 24, 2017
By Nancy Hixt

The primary investigator from the Calgary Police Forensic Crime Scene Unit is testifying Tuesday in the triple-murder trial of Douglas Garland.

http://globalnews.ca/news/3199801/d...ial-to-hear-details-of-forensic-exam-of-farm/

Tweets from yesterday included at above link.

 

[Krystine]

Not that anything in this case really makes sense in a logical way but has it been explored at all that he could of parked in the garage? This would of made more sense then the driveway to load the three into the back of the truck?

There was a detached garage in back, but the 'drag marks' referred to when we followed the case in 2014 led to the front of the house.

 

[Hatfield]

I'm assuming microchips are probably from a cell phone. Someone already mentioned it but he may have been trying to destroy his cell phone in fear of being tracked. He may have overlooked that initial and had his cell phone with him and turned on when he went to the Liknes home. As such, there would probably be saved records of his travels. I wonder if his cell phone provider has those records and if the police asked for tracking data from the phone company.

I just wanted to agree with you about thinking the microchips could be from cell phone(s).

I recently got a new cell phone. The kind with no contract and it had a small microchip that plugged in the back of it that I had to plug in it. And many circuit boards on it too.

Either his cell phone or the victims cell phones is what I was thinking the microchips came from.

Also the mention of that could have really meant circuit board and maybe called it microchip.