Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 June 2014 - #4

[Stirner]

I'd have to say, IMHO, that not every family stricken with anxiety, grief and remorse is comfortable in front of cameras. I'm only (marginally) familiar with the TB case in which instance a very tight religious ultra-conservative community with influential national and international ties, took up the cause with extensive media and internet savvy and tremendous determination, IMO. As far as the general media was concerned any investigation whatsoever into the interlinking personal relationships, business deals or financial affairs of the victim or any members of TB's family was pretty much verboten (which, if you ask me, is/was a very great shame, because there remain numerous issues of potential significance rooted there, imo, which may, or may not, ever be investigated.)

It all seems very different in this case, where the private business and personal relationships of the victims themselves and many members of their families are all fair game, chewed over for details, IMO, by anyone, anywhere, with an internet connection. Every case is different, of course, and different in every way. IMO. Time will hopefully provide accurate answers. But I definitely don't think there's anything alarming about this family or those thousands of other families of missing loved ones who do not choose to run to the cameras at every opportunity , turning their tragic circumstances into bizarre public theatre but, instead, choose to quietly trust the expertise of LE. IMO. IMHO.

The difference is that there was no connection between Bosma and his alleged killers whatsoever. Why would you think it's a shame that Bosma's irrelevant co-workers weren't named and harassed, and what ever gave you the impression that investigation into such things was 'verboten'?? [modsnip]

 

[Stirner]

I don't think most parents would want to leave their child asleep at someone elses house and have them wake up and realize mom is suddenly gone in the morning. Or worse, the middle of the night. It was probably more like Nathan was having so much fun at grandma & grandpa's that he didn't want to leave so mom agreed to let him stay the night.

Either way I don't think Nathan would be particularly alarmed about waking up at his grandparents house, wondering where his mother is. Afterall he would have known what he was doing the previous day, and where he fell asleep the previous night...

 

[casesensitive]

Quote otto:

"Court documents reveal Garland was allegedly found to be in possession of the identification of Matthew Hartley on July 4 and was charged the next day with the intention of using it to commit an indictable offence."

That's the one otto. Thanks. So does this "indictable offence" just mean he intended to use a stolen ID and THAT is the indictable offence? I guess I read more into it than that.

Thanks kittymeow for also trying to find the tweet. I think the wording was very similar to the above, but I know it was a tweet.

 

[HulaMum]

People should be wondering about the totally off-the-wall white collar murders that seem to happen in Canada's oil hub. It looks like they're starting to pile up and define the nature of high stress, big money breakdowns.

Phew, I'm in more of a high stress, small money world over here, so I may be OK after all. j/k, I find all of this very unsettling and upsetting.

But really, I think you are on to something. Money, money, money, ... this place is different alright.

On another note, I have been back in Nathan's first thread from Monday night, rereading, thinking and comparing things to what we know now.

 

[ztzt]

Regardless whether DG was involved in the car accident that killed Matthew Harley, since he himself had a "horrific car crash caused when he fell asleep at the wheel", shouldn't there be a record about that crash associated with him (unless he was not caught)?

 

[girlfriday]

I don't think most parents would want to leave their child asleep at someone elses house and have them wake up and realize mom is suddenly gone in the morning. Or worse, the middle of the night. It was probably more like Nathan was having so much fun at grandma & grandpa's that he didn't want to leave so mom agreed to let him stay the night.

That sounds right to me - summer is the beginning of the late nights and late mornings for the schooled aged ones, from my experience.

[modsnip]

 

[otto]

No, I don't think JO thought her son was in any sort of danger when she left him with his grandparents. Not at all. She felt he was safe there.

I think her words "he wasn't supposed to be there" were spoken out of regret, the way that a mother always blames herself even for things that are out of her control. It was bad timing. It could have happened any other night! Why, why, why on this night that she had left him there? It would be the same as if the one day you let your child walk to school they get hit by a car. You'd just be filled with anger and regret for the unfair timing of it. My heart breaks for JO. I hope she can someday have that burden lifted from her. She absolutely thought her son would be safe with his grandparents IMO.

She did. Did she know anything about a possible conflict between the person of interest and her parents, or was this completely out of the blue?

 

[kittymeow]

Either way I don't think Nathan would be particularly alarmed about waking up at his grandparents house, wondering where his mother is. Afterall he would have known what he was doing the previous day, and where he fell asleep the previous night...

Maybe he would wake up and panic, maybe he'd be fine with it. Neither of us can say for sure either way. Just seems like most parents would rather wake up a child and bring them home instead of risking upsetting their child and doing all that unnecessary traveling back and forth.

 

[otto]

Either way I don't think Nathan would be particularly alarmed about waking up at his grandparents house, wondering where his mother is. Afterall he would have known what he was doing the previous day, and where he fell asleep the previous night...

But he might feel left behind if he fell asleep and his almost 2 year old little brother went home with mom. Don't children notice things like that?

 

[Eldrick]

Regardless whether DG was involved in the car accident that killed Matthew Harley, since he himself had a "horrific car crash caused when he fell asleep at the wheel", shouldn't there be a record about that crash associated with him (unless he was not caught)?

Unless the timeline doesn't fit, or there are legitimate details available, couldn't the whole 'car crash' story possibly be a fabrication?
In assuming the identity of MKH, maybe DG took parts of the real life story of the poor deceased young boy and wove that into his new fake persona.
Who knows... just my mind wandering probably.

 

[casesensitive]

Regardless whether DG was involved in the car accident that killed Matthew Harley, since he himself had a "horrific car crash caused when he fell asleep at the wheel", shouldn't there be a record about that crash associated with him (unless he was not caught)?

There should be a record about DG causing a horrific accident. Thanks for finding the article which resolves any question about DG being involved in Matt H's death. His mother doesn't know him.

ztzt Post #586

According to this report

'Matt’s Hartley’s mother, June, said the family didn’t know Douglas Garland. Reached at her nursing home, she declined to speak further about her dead son.

“No. There would be no point. No point at all,” she told the National Post.'

I don't think he got away with the accident that he caused, since he used it in Court as an excuse for causing him trauma. (I have to learn how to properly quote from more than one post).

 

[otto]

Quote otto:

"Court documents reveal Garland was allegedly found to be in possession of the identification of Matthew Hartley on July 4 and was charged the next day with the intention of using it to commit an indictable offence."

That's the one otto. Thanks. So does this "indictable offence" just mean he intended to use a stolen ID and THAT is the indictable offence? I guess I read more into it than that.

Thanks kittymeow for also trying to find the tweet. I think the wording was very similar to the above, but I know it was a tweet.

Attempting to commit an indictable offence probably relates to paperwork for the truck. If he had any vehicle paperwork in the name of Mathew Hartley, it would constitute an attempt to commit an indictable offence. That is, he had the paperwork, he wasn't caught using it, but having it constitutes intent.

 

[otto]

Unless the timeline doesn't fit, or there are legitimate details available, couldn't the whole 'car crash' story possibly be a fabrication?
In assuming the identity of MKH, maybe DG took parts of the real life story of the poor deceased young boy and wove that into his new fake persona.
Who knows... just my mind wandering probably.

Are you thinking that he was trying to convince everyone that he was indeed Mathew Hartley, that he had in fact survived the horrific crash that took the life of his sister? He was "role playing" to try to fool people into believing his false identify?

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Not to be a downer... But... The operative words being "possession of the identification". From credit card or passport applications, to a whole host of other uses... Intent could mean anything.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Are you thinking that he was trying to convince everyone that he was indeed Mathew Hartley, that he had in fact survived the horrific crash that took the life of his sister? He was "role playing" to try to fool people into believing his false identify?

I do believe that story was from the 2005 court transcript. Although it wouldn't be the first time a story was told to gain sympathy from the court, one would be intelligent not to make up a story during testimony. I suspect there is some truth to it.

 

[otto]

Maybe he would wake up and panic, maybe he'd be fine with it. Neither of us can say for sure either way. Just seems like most parents would rather wake up a child and bring them home instead of risking upsetting their child and doing all that unnecessary traveling back and forth.

Exactly. If you're taking one child home to bed, why not take both, especially if it means not having to pack one up in the morning to collect the other. Was there a plan for mom to help sort out the leftovers from the house contents sale in the morning, or was she only picking up her son? It had been a couple of busy days with the house contents sale ... wouldn't a working, married mom with young children be looking forward to family time after the busy sale days on the four day long weekend?

 

[Eldrick]

Are you thinking that he was trying to convince everyone that he was indeed Mathew Hartley, that he had in fact survived the horrific crash that took the life of his sister? He was "role playing" to try to fool people into believing his false identify?

Not necessarily. Everybody has to have a story though - and if you are creating a new persona based on a false identity, you might steal bits and pieces of truth in the creation of that identity. Just speculation on my part - and thinking more about it - as DG's car crash story was used in court as causing him trauma, that incident might have needed to be verified for the court.

 

[SilkySifaka]

I'd have to say, IMHO, that not every family stricken with anxiety, grief and remorse is comfortable in front of cameras. I'm only (marginally) familiar with the TB case in which instance a very tight religious ultra-conservative community with influential national and international ties, took up the cause with extensive media and internet savvy and tremendous determination, IMO. As far as the general media was concerned any investigation whatsoever into the interlinking personal relationships, business deals or financial affairs of the victim or any members of TB's family was pretty much verboten (which, if you ask me, is/was a very great shame, because there remain numerous issues of potential significance rooted there, imo, which may, or may not, ever be investigated.)

It all seems very different in this case, where the private business and personal relationships of the victims themselves and many members of their families are all fair game, chewed over for details, IMO, by anyone, anywhere, with an internet connection. Every case is different, of course, and different in every way. IMO. Time will hopefully provide accurate answers. But I definitely don't think there's anything alarming about this family or those thousands of other families of missing loved ones who do not choose to run to the cameras at every opportunity , turning their tragic circumstances into bizarre public theatre but, instead, choose to quietly trust the expertise of LE. IMO. IMHO.

True, and this case has already garnered the high profile media attention that is needed for most missing person cases, i think if things ground to a stall you would see comments by family though. In many of the cases that family do go the media (daily in some cases) it is necessary to get the public involved and keep them involved especially if LE is taking it as a runaway or voluntary disappearance, or if its a child. In the infamous Jessica Lunsford case, it was Mark - her dad - who had daily pressers and kept the heat on LE and the public searched and others gave tips. But it was a case of a family with little resources except to put themselves out there, they didn't have fb or savvy etc.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Exactly. If you're taking one child home to bed, why not take both, especially if it means not having to pack one up in the morning to collect the other. Was there a plan for mom to help sort out the leftovers from the house contents sale in the morning, or was she only picking up her son? It had been a couple of busy days with the house contents sale ... wouldn't a working, married mom with young children be looking forward to family time after the busy sale days on the four day long weekend?

It's tough to fight a "Please please please can I stay?!" And speaking from experience, when a young one wants to give you free time without separation anxiety... You jump on it.

This, to me, just seems like one of those times that you think "what could go wrong" that turns into "why didn't I do it differently"... This is every parent's nightmare. Regardless of the circumstances that lead up to it, the parents have my every sympathy for having to live with the memory of making that choice.

 

[kittymeow]

Are you thinking that he was trying to convince everyone that he was indeed Mathew Hartley, that he had in fact survived the horrific crash that took the life of his sister? He was "role playing" to try to fool people into believing his false identify?

edit: nvm. I completely misinterpreted the context of what I was responding to!