Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #28

[kdgdid]

Sanders is subbing in for Lutz because Lutz was dealing with the Amber Lucius case.

I admit I am horrible with names but I am so confused by the lawyer situation this morning. Has Sanders ever been in court before today?

 

[Cherchri]

I admit I am horrible with names but I am so confused by the lawyer situation this morning. Has Sanders ever been in court before today?

Nope and she's using an Alias (sorry I can't help myself - someone actually named their child Alias??????)

 

[JadeSLeuth]

Nancy HixtVerified account ‏@NancyHixt 39s40 seconds ago
Breaking: Justice Gates will give his decision at 1:30pm MT #Garland

Lucie Edwardson ‏@MetroLucie 42s43 seconds ago
Judge will return with decision at 1:30 #Garland

Bryan LabbyVerified account ‏@CBCBryan 52s53 seconds ago
Decision at 1:30 #Garland

Bryan LabbyVerified account ‏@CBCBryan 1m1 minute ago
Crown is now providing details about why #Garland lived under someone else's name for 7 years, "He was on the run from the law"

Meghan GrantVerified account ‏@CBCMeg 2m2 minutes ago
Crown says #Garland has a criminal record in BC as well as Alberta

Lucie Edwardson ‏@MetroLucie 2m2 minutes ago
More
Crown is explaining that when #Garland lived under another identity in BC it was because he was on the run for drug trafficking charges

 

[JadeSLeuth]

Raffy BoudjikanianVerified account ‏@CBCRaffy 2m2 minutes ago
Judge says will read decision at 13:30, dismisses courtroom. #Garland

 

[Cherchri]

Okay, stop with the $hit show, the family has been through enough. Just lock him up and throw away the key.

Sorry for the attitude, but Kathy, Alvin, and Nathan weren't treated with respect and dignity....why should this monster be?

That's exactly how we should view the situation. Well said pugmom XX

 

[olivebpa1]

Raffy BoudjikanianVerified account ‏@CBCRaffy 2m2 minutes ago
Judge says will read decision at 13:30, dismisses courtroom. #Garland

Well this may be a bit of an awkward lunch break between Ross and Sanders!

 

[casesensitive]

Nope and she's using an Alias (sorry I can't help myself - someone actually named their child Alias??????)

And a defense attorney at that. lol

 

[PrincessButtercup]

I'm not sure what the hell just happened there.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

 

[olivebpa1]

So even after that big huge mess I still think that Justice Gates is going to come back with two consecutive sentences and one concurrent. I would love for him to give the crown what they are requesting but I think giving him 50 years without parole is the safer sentence in terms of appealing the sentence. He will be dead in 50 years anyways so I would be okay with that.

 

[olivebpa1]

Oh and I hope Gates really sticks it to Garland and his statement. And is anyone else curious about what adjectives Jennifer O'Brien used to describe Garland in her closing statements? I know I can think of a few!

 

[JadeSLeuth]

[video=twitter;832679570218168323]https://twitter.com/CBCCalgary/status/832679570218168323[/video]

 

[JadeSLeuth]

I'm not sure what the hell just happened there.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

Best.

 

[dyannaON]

[video=twitter;832679570218168323]https://twitter.com/CBCCalgary/status/832679570218168323[/video]

Heartbreaking picture.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JadeSLeuth]

So even after that big huge mess I still think that Justice Gates is going to come back with two consecutive sentences and one concurrent. I would love for him to give the crown what they are requesting but I think giving him 50 years without parole is the safer sentence in terms of appealing the sentence. He will be dead in 50 years anyways so I would be okay with that.

I agree Olive.

 

[otto]

In reading just some of the law related to consecutive sentencing, it looks like it doesn't apply because there was one event. I don't really agree that because Nathan wasn't part of the plan, it is a separate event. I think that consecutive sentencing leaves the door wide open for an appeal based on whether the three murders were one event, or more than one event. All three murders are considered pre-meditated, they all happened at the same time, so how can one of the pre-meditate murders be viewed differently?

"Other principles include the “totality principle,” namely, that where consecutive sentences are imposed, the combined sentence should not be unduly long or harsh, along with the principle that all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders.
...

The cases where the discretion to impose concurrent or consecutive sentences has been considered have tended to follow the proposition that sentences should generally be served consecutively when they arise from separate and distinct transactions.6
...

As noted above, this is subject to a common law rule that unrelated criminal offences will usually have consecutive sentences applied to them and the statutory rule that, where consecutive sentences are imposed, the combined sentence should not be “unduly long or harsh” (section 718.2(c) of the Code).

The amended section also addresses the situation where multiple sentences are being imposed at the same time. In such a case, under section 718.3(4)(b), a court must consider directing that these sentences be served consecutively when the offences do not arise from the same event or series of events, when one of the offences was committed while the accused was on judicial interim release (also called “bail”), or when one of the offences was committed while the accused was fleeing from a peace officer.18"​

http://www.lop.parl.gc.ca/About/Par.../bills_ls.asp?ls=c26&Parl=41&Ses=2&Language=E

 

[CentralAlberta]

Wow, just wow. I don't know how that family could sit their all morning listening to this. Talk about humiliating. I can't believe victim impact statements are edited. Isn't that the idea of them - let the victims tell their side of the story. Oh yes, I forgot criminals have rights - more rights than victims. As far as I'm concerned, after what he did to them, they are entitled to say whatever they want. I guess there is comfort in knowing he did read their words. Does this Alias (if that is in fact her real name) actually work for Ross and Lutz?? If so, hopefully not much longer. I can't imagine what this trial would have been like if she was there the whole time. I have changed my mind about 75 years vs 50. I think it should be 50. Otherwise, his name will always be brought up as to having the longest sentence, along with the other 2. He needs to go away into his little hole and never be thought of again. Too bad Kingston isn't still open.

 

[otto]

I think Sanders is making a good argument, and that Ross made a legal error in stating that sentencing for the Liknes couple could be consecutive.

 

[JadeSLeuth]

[video=twitter;832683584817225729]https://twitter.com/CBCCalgary/status/832683584817225729[/video]

 

[Cherchri]

And a defense attorney at that. lol

Right! Such an irony

 

[JadeSLeuth]

I think Sanders is making a good argument, and that Ross made a legal error in stating that sentencing for the Liknes couple could be consecutive.

Thank you for your cool-headed, fact-based thinking otto.