Kind of interesting...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/douglas-garland-balfour-der-lawyer-beating-1.4015967
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/douglas-garland-balfour-der-lawyer-beating-1.4015967
Still Missing Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 *Guilty* *Appeal* #29
- Thread starter Sillybilly
- Start date
Hilarious that he refers to a "bunch of hooligans" - many of these "hooligans" are probably people he defended and did everything in his power to keep from going to prison. Yes, I know, criminal defense lawyers are necessary and everyone has a right to a defense etc etc. Still ironic as hell though. Can't stand that guy.
True but I thought it was interesting when the reporter asked him about the people in Calgary and if he feels (B Der) DG should get sympathy. I thought he backed up pretty quickly.
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,332
- Reaction score
- 117,404
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,332
- Reaction score
- 117,404
As Douglas Garland is appealing his sentence, this thread is re-opened for respectful discussion.
As always, keep The Rules in mind when posting.
Thanks.
As always, keep The Rules in mind when posting.
Thanks.
MistyWaters
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2017
- Messages
- 12,003
- Reaction score
- 67,218
Thanks Sillybilly!
I’m totally appalled the the Judges have reserved their decision for this appeal by Garland for a later date as I expected it would be immediately dismissed. The family must be absolutely heartbroken to have this creature creating attention once again.
One of the appeal arguments is LE did not have justification to search the farm without a search warrant - -
“What was lacking was a reason to believe these people were on the farm in order to conduct the search or any indication from the farm that they would be there," Sanders told court.
"The only facets of the evidence that linked this to the farm was the sighting of a truck believed to be Garland's and historic animus that had never come to any kind of violence or threats in the past."...
......Investigators didn't have a warrant and were searching the farm in the belief that the three victims may have been held hostage there.
"It was clear that the police were willing to go as far as they needed to go. The judge was clearly willing to excuse whatever the police thought they needed to do to search the farm," Sanders said.
"It's indicative of the wide latitude given to the police without regards to the constitutional rights of Mr. Garland."...”
Alberta's top court reserves decision on appeal of triple murderer
I’m totally appalled the the Judges have reserved their decision for this appeal by Garland for a later date as I expected it would be immediately dismissed. The family must be absolutely heartbroken to have this creature creating attention once again.
One of the appeal arguments is LE did not have justification to search the farm without a search warrant - -
“What was lacking was a reason to believe these people were on the farm in order to conduct the search or any indication from the farm that they would be there," Sanders told court.
"The only facets of the evidence that linked this to the farm was the sighting of a truck believed to be Garland's and historic animus that had never come to any kind of violence or threats in the past."...
......Investigators didn't have a warrant and were searching the farm in the belief that the three victims may have been held hostage there.
"It was clear that the police were willing to go as far as they needed to go. The judge was clearly willing to excuse whatever the police thought they needed to do to search the farm," Sanders said.
"It's indicative of the wide latitude given to the police without regards to the constitutional rights of Mr. Garland."...”
Alberta's top court reserves decision on appeal of triple murderer
No search warrant to search the farm? Did police ask Garland's parents for permission, or did they simply appear and start their search? Even if they did ask the parent's permission, was that a verbal agreement with no paper trail?
I'm curious whether a successful appeal means that the prosecutor will find an authentic line of reasoning to justify the search, or whether all evidence from the farm will be excluded.
I'm curious whether a successful appeal means that the prosecutor will find an authentic line of reasoning to justify the search, or whether all evidence from the farm will be excluded.
If there was serious (such as this) issue with the validity of the evidence, wouldn't this have been dealt with before the trial, or at the trial? I know they always hold pre trial hearings to deal with such things?
I guess if DG did not want them to have free reign at his property, he should have left the dead bodies at the home, instead of taking them with him. That way, LE would not have had a valid reason to search without a warrant.
I guess if DG did not want them to have free reign at his property, he should have left the dead bodies at the home, instead of taking them with him. That way, LE would not have had a valid reason to search without a warrant.
From memory, I think DG was pulled over by LE while he was on a public road while driving the green truck. I think they took him in for questioning, and were allowed to hold him for a given length of time without charging him. Was that when LE was doing those searches, and if so, why didn't they arrest him right at the time? They subsequently let him go and later charged him and brought him in again. I'll have to look back to confirm the accuracy of my memory.
I think it's reasonable to delay, the court has to review the statutes and case law, consider the submissions from both sides, come to a decision and write it up. They have to state their reasons, since the next step for Garland will be the Supreme Court: if they write out a thorough and clear decision, an appeal to the Supreme Court will, hopefully, be denied.
Oregonmama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2012
- Messages
- 7,623
- Reaction score
- 36,893
it is the defendant's right to appeal but that doesn't mean the verdict will get overturned. Garland is a and will remain behind bars until he dies.
I haven't scrolled back through all these pages, but I'd like to know who's funding this defense--the government can't (and shouldn't) fund every defense. As I've told Otto and Mistywaters and a few others, I'm a fifth generation Calgarian who's moved to the US.
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,332
- Reaction score
- 117,404
I think the prosecution should be able to justify the search as exigent circumstances; IOW, once the truck was located at the farm, there was still a chance Nathan and his grandparents were being held alive at the farm which means they could go in without a warrant.
If the only reason they were looking for the truck is because it was seen on CCTV on the road where the family was murdered, it that reason enough to assume that he is the murderer or to search the property?
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,332
- Reaction score
- 117,404
IIRC, one of the victims was believed to be in medical distress, combined with the truck having been identified as belonging to Garland who had a grudge against Alvin, and the perceived necessity for a quick rescue of individuals whose lives may be at risk ... IMO constitutes exigent circumstances.
I think the "medical distress" statement was based on a trail of blood from the door to the driveway, reported as an 8 meter long blood trail. I think that, and a bloody scene in the house, was evidence that the couple had been murdered and were not just in medical distress.
A truck that belongs to someone who at one time had business with one of the victims might lead to questions, but it is not evidence that the owner of the truck murdered the couple or that bodies might be on his property. A missing search warrant is a bit of a problem given how extensive the search was, and how long it lasted.
I always wondered why the prosecutor argued that the victims were alive at the farm. Perhaps it was to bypass the search warrant oversight. If it was believed that the victims were alive, then perhaps they had an urgent need to search the property without a warrant. However, given all the blood at the home, evidence that bodies were dragged out, and the time that had passed, was it realistic to believe that they were alive? I never believed that they were alive at the farm, and no evidence was presented that they were alive at the farm. This warrant issue might be why the prosecution boldly claimed that they were alive without presenting supportive evidence.
Lalalacasbah
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2014
- Messages
- 2,968
- Reaction score
- 5,896
IIRC, police were making a short list of people who might have issues with AL/KL from the get-go, DG was on that list and DG was on LE's radar right off the bat. Then the truck footage came through, so a more definite link. I remember being surprised to hear DG was on a list of 4-5 people LE were looking at right at the beginning.