I'm sitting here trying to figure out what angle the Defence could use to defend their client and I can't come up with anything. There are no glaring holes int he evidence. The only thing that is surprising is that DG's DNA was not found in the Liknes home.
They can't even try to suggest that someone else was responsible for what occurred at the Farm as DG's DNA along with the victims' come together.
The Prosecution has proven that the victims were murdered, that their bodies were at the farm, that saws and meat hooks were used on them, that DG's rubber gloves and boots had DNA of all 3 victims along with his DNA on the insides. KL'S DNA was found under the license plate of the truck DG drove. That same truck was seen outside their home the night they disappeared. And then to top it all off, DNA was found of all 3 victims around and in...the burn barrel.
We also have evidence of him purchasing blades, meat hooks and grinders at Princess Auto. We know about his hideous research however the Defence would like us to believe that it's possible he wasn't the one doing the research or using the computer. And he hid the hard drive.
What's to defend? He doesn't have friends that can be called as witnesses to say he was somewhere else. His own family were called by the Prosecution.
I'm going out on a limb and suggesting that the DG will not be putting on a defence. However, I could be wrong because I think DG wants to put on a defence.
Whatever they choose to do will be of no consequence. DG is guilty and he's going straight to jail with no GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD!
MOO