I guess the time of death may be impossible to prove, but the aerial pictures at least will give some sort of closure.. I'm hoping GD botched his evil plans.
Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #24
- Thread starter Coldpizza
- Start date
New Posts
-
Japan - Miyazawa family of 4 murdered, Setagaya, Tokyo, 30 Dec 2000 #3- Latest: Charlot123
- Status
Was it ever mentioned as to the DNA found in the 2 teeth which were found at the L residence and which were NOT burned?
ETA: Nevermind, no DNA testimony has taken place yet, so I guess we won't find out until later. I'm guessing that the teeth that HAVE already been discussed are not going to produce results in that regard, else they likely wouldn't have already been mentioned? They did have a dentist on the stand, did he speak about the 2 teeth found inside the home? (I don't recall reading about that, sorry if I missed it, hard to keep up some days).
ETA: Nevermind, no DNA testimony has taken place yet, so I guess we won't find out until later. I'm guessing that the teeth that HAVE already been discussed are not going to produce results in that regard, else they likely wouldn't have already been mentioned? They did have a dentist on the stand, did he speak about the 2 teeth found inside the home? (I don't recall reading about that, sorry if I missed it, hard to keep up some days).
I believe the DNA expert is set to testify next week.
ETA: Just noticed you answered your own question
A forensic dentist testified that 1 of the teeth found in the L home was consistent with AL. The other tooth he called a "virgin" tooth because it had never been worked on so he was unable to say who it belonged to.
Tweet Trial Day#2, Jan 17/17 -
https://twitter.com/MetroLucie
"Doreen confirms Douglas #Garland had supper with she and her husband the night of June 29/14. She went to bed around 9 #yyc"
I don't understand that. Is DNA not obtainable from a tooth? These teeth weren't burned. Did the dentist say he sent it in for DNA testing and this part was left for the DNA expert?
PrincessButtercup
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 693
- Reaction score
- 88
I'm going to assume that the DNA experts will also be able to testify regarding the teeth found in the home.
Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
Teeth belonging to the victims at their home doesn't really need proof that they belong to the victims. DNA for the teeth found at the Airdrie property is what is needed.
Teeth could have been from the murderer. I think they'd want the dna from the teeth tested if possible.
He was a dentist not a DNA expert. We do not know if there is further evidence on the tooth at this point.
What we know is that teeth were found at the Liknes home, and what appears to be teeth were found in the burn barrel. The teeth in the barrel are similar to those of an adult and a child.
Seems to me that proving that teeth in the house belong to the victims doesn't reinforce the point that Douglas Garland is guilty. Proving that teeth in the burn barrel belong to the victims is important to convict the suspect. My understanding is that the burn barrel teeth can only be described as similar to adult and child teeth.
2Hope4
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 7,095
- Reaction score
- 11,532
I"m actually enjoying the step by step process that allowed the prosecutors or the crown to come to the conclusion that DG is guilty as charged. They are showing each step, which the jury should easily be able to follow.
I truly think that was a mistake made in Casey Anthony's trial. I remember watching that trial, and when they said it was closing arguments, I was like WHAT?!??! Prosecution didn't connect the dots!! There was much more known about that case than what was presented, and though I cried when the verdict was read, I was not shocked. I had moments before told my friend that she would be found not guilty simply because there was too much lacking in the presentation of evidence. Had I been on the jury, sadly I would have to vote the same as they did....even though I truly felt she was guilty.
I truly think that was a mistake made in Casey Anthony's trial. I remember watching that trial, and when they said it was closing arguments, I was like WHAT?!??! Prosecution didn't connect the dots!! There was much more known about that case than what was presented, and though I cried when the verdict was read, I was not shocked. I had moments before told my friend that she would be found not guilty simply because there was too much lacking in the presentation of evidence. Had I been on the jury, sadly I would have to vote the same as they did....even though I truly felt she was guilty.
Let's hope, since to date, they haven't even been confirmed to have been human.
Tweets from Lucie Edwardson ‏@MetroLucie, Day 13, February 2/17:
"Dr. Blair said it was "very likely" or "more likely than not" a human baby tooth. #Garland #yyc"
"Another sample had "consistencies enough" with Alvin Liknes that Dr. Blair said he couldn't rule him out. #Garland #yyc"
musicaljoke
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2013
- Messages
- 7,260
- Reaction score
- 38,279
You could be right. DG possibly is obsessive in other areas of his life, such as the time that he takes a shower, so perhaps his parents firmly recalled the time he took a shower because it was oddly outside of his normal schedule. But that question wasn't asked, so we can't assume it is true.
I imagine that his mother routinely did his laundry. Unless he had as many shirts and pants as shoes, you'd think that she might have noticed some missing clothing. However, that's just my speculation that leads no where. She loves her son and wasn't about to incriminate him.
PrincessButtercup and myself had been independently keeping spreadsheets of trial witnesses and compared them for differences, merged/corrected them and I'm posting a pic here for reference. It can come in handy when looking for particular info. If neither of us has missed anyone, there have been 37 witnesses to date. If anyone notices errors or omissions, please let me know. We counted Constable Brian Clark twice since he was called to the stand twice for different testimonies. We didn't count ASFs.
It was said the trial is expected to last 5 weeks and present 50 Crown witnesses. They'll be starting week#4 on Monday with 13 more witnesses to present. I believe the 5 week period was to include time for defence witnesses, closing arguments, and deliberations, however we won't know if the defence will present any witnesses until the Crown's case is complete.
It was said the trial is expected to last 5 weeks and present 50 Crown witnesses. They'll be starting week#4 on Monday with 13 more witnesses to present. I believe the 5 week period was to include time for defence witnesses, closing arguments, and deliberations, however we won't know if the defence will present any witnesses until the Crown's case is complete.
http://www.metronews.ca/news/calgar...ien-mother-testify-douglas-garland-trial.html
Attachments
MistyWaters
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2017
- Messages
- 12,003
- Reaction score
- 67,217
I thought I'd share this Globe and Mail article written by a lawyer. It was written within 2 weeks of the discovery of the disappearance and maybe just me, but I get the distinct impression Mr Butt served as a consultant to the protection on this case.
It's also interesting to note it refers to the Likness murders and given the date it was written, more or less aligns with evidence presented that within two weeks it was already established no bodies were likely to be found. Meanwhile we, the general public, held out optimistic hope for many months longer that the remains might still be discovered because we knew nothing of the contents of the burning barrel, hoping for the Likness and O'Brien families to at least have closure.
This example of tight control of information also demonstrates the vast contrast between the Canadian and American Justice systems and respective media. For example high profile murder cases in the US and 80% of even 90% of what's spread through the media or talk shows as entertainment to a scandal-loving public is never proven nor presented as evidence, yet it surely shapes the publics perception of guilt or innocence long before the actual trial occurs. I like our Canadian protection of information much better, it's far more fair to everyone involved.
Anyway, this is the link.
DAVID BUTT - July 15, 2014
How do you prove murder without a body?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/how-do-you-prove-murder-without-a-body/article19610440/
It's also interesting to note it refers to the Likness murders and given the date it was written, more or less aligns with evidence presented that within two weeks it was already established no bodies were likely to be found. Meanwhile we, the general public, held out optimistic hope for many months longer that the remains might still be discovered because we knew nothing of the contents of the burning barrel, hoping for the Likness and O'Brien families to at least have closure.
This example of tight control of information also demonstrates the vast contrast between the Canadian and American Justice systems and respective media. For example high profile murder cases in the US and 80% of even 90% of what's spread through the media or talk shows as entertainment to a scandal-loving public is never proven nor presented as evidence, yet it surely shapes the publics perception of guilt or innocence long before the actual trial occurs. I like our Canadian protection of information much better, it's far more fair to everyone involved.
Anyway, this is the link.
DAVID BUTT - July 15, 2014
How do you prove murder without a body?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/how-do-you-prove-murder-without-a-body/article19610440/
Wouldn't it be perfect if the elder Garlands had arranged for the areal pics to be taken. Perhaps they were already planning to sell and downsize and wanted a memory of their country property.
Personally, from what I've seen presented by the Crown so far I am going to trust they do have evidence to back up their claims. We as the public were (rightly so) kept in the dark about this case. I went back on the threads of the amber alert and saw the photos of police in the fields and near the sloughs. We had so many guesses at that time about what happened and now as we are being presented with evidence from the iIknes home and the Garland farm it is clear how much information we were missing.
I think of the witnesses as bread crumbs. Oxton said in his investigation they dealt with forensic anthropologist, the ME provided piece of a report authored by one - I think she will give testimony. Her speciality is cremated bones. We heard about blood and DNA sampled taken - we will hear about the results. In fact I think other crumbs left by testimony - sentences and things mentioned that made us say "what" will be revealed - like the show video, even further info on MH id may prove to have more relevance than we realize.
It IS like an onion. As each person involved saw their piece of the puzzle they are presenting it and whether it was taken to someone else for further analysis.
The photos of bodies may reveal signs of torture or mutilation. We don't know what we have not seen yet. The fact that the defence has not objected more leads me to believe that in the course of disclosure they know the Crown's case is solid.
I think of the witnesses as bread crumbs. Oxton said in his investigation they dealt with forensic anthropologist, the ME provided piece of a report authored by one - I think she will give testimony. Her speciality is cremated bones. We heard about blood and DNA sampled taken - we will hear about the results. In fact I think other crumbs left by testimony - sentences and things mentioned that made us say "what" will be revealed - like the show video, even further info on MH id may prove to have more relevance than we realize.
It IS like an onion. As each person involved saw their piece of the puzzle they are presenting it and whether it was taken to someone else for further analysis.
The photos of bodies may reveal signs of torture or mutilation. We don't know what we have not seen yet. The fact that the defence has not objected more leads me to believe that in the course of disclosure they know the Crown's case is solid.
- Status