Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 June 2014 - #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Two mothers organize search party to look for O’Brien and Liknes bodies

http://www.660news.com/2014/07/15/t...h-party-to-look-for-obrien-and-liknes-bodies/

IMO I think this is foolish. I don't believe that civilians should be out and about traipsing in and around Airdrie looking for bodies. There's more to evidence collection and looking for bodies than just looking around willy-nilly. What if any of them come across something pertinent and it's not handled correctly and it jeopardizes the case? DG's lawyer would just love that, I'm sure. Big thumbs down for this idea.
 
You should also read the Psychopath Test, which argues that if 1 in 20 average people exhibit psychopathic traits, those traits are twice as likely to appear in CEOs and politicians.
 
Hi, new here.

Why take the bodies at all ? I find that puzzling.
 
IMO I think this is foolish. I don't believe that civilians should be out and about traipsing in and around Airdrie looking for bodies. There's more to evidence collection and looking for bodies than just looking around willy-nilly. What if any of them come across something pertinent and it's not handled correctly and it jeopardizes the case? DG's lawyer would just love that, I'm sure. Big thumbs down for this idea.
It's better than no searching I would think.... Hopefully they will brief the searchers as far as the correct protocol if something is found.
 
It's better than no searching I would think....


LE is not giving up on the search.

Volunteer hearts are in the right place, but have to agree with LayzeeDayzee that evidence could be contaminated and that would be tragic.
 
I have located this interesting and much-cited original post by Dangeross: (also attaching two pictures of the greenhouse) (underline by me)

07-07-2014, 04:08 PM #251

Dangeross said:
A friend of mine lives very very close to the acreage, he mentioned today (and to the police of course) on Tuesday night he woke in the middle of the night and noticed the lights on in the greenhouse at the acreage which struck him as odd, he said they always burn their garbage also and the following morning they were burning garbage the entire day. None of this would be completely out of the ordinary without knowing the circumstances we know now.
 

Attachments

  • chopper4_1.jpg
    chopper4_1.jpg
    254.5 KB · Views: 53
  • chopper6_1.jpg
    chopper6_1.jpg
    287.1 KB · Views: 50
But you are assuming that disposal was immediate and that there was no temporary storage. It is possible that the victims (in either a living or deceased state) were moved from the home to a second location (possibly the Airdrie acreage) before finally being dumped in a final location over the subsequent two or three days.

I am making the assumption that the first thing the murderer wanted to do was remove the bodies from the scene (to hopefully remove evidence of himself and the murder) and to then distance himself from the bodies. According to police, this was premeditated, meaning that the suspect put a lot of time into meticulously planning these murders. Part of that plan would have included careful consideration of hiding the bodies. As there are no kidnapping charges, I'm going to assume that no one was kidnapped, but rather that three people were murdered and, per the police chief, bodies were removed to obfuscate the evidence. I'm going to go strictly on what police have said rather than "what ifs".
 
You know, just thinking, we're not privy to the suspect's knowledge/thinking, the family's knowledge, and even LE's knowledge, in terms of where to begin to think to look for the bodies. It's really too vast an area and so spread out, where he could have travelled to. He had much time before he was first picked up and arrested, and he may very well have put the bodies in a temporary location so that he could go back to the house and clean up or do whatever he likely did there. There was a report from a neighbour that lived close to the corner and end of the street, that heard what sounded like a speeding truck going around the corner in the early morning hours. And, for his safe-keeping, that temporary location may not have been on the Airdrie acreage per se, but perhaps some reasonable distance from there that he knew of that likely would be safe for a certain period of time.

I believe it's truly like looking for a needle in a haystack in what is most likely a rural, and possibly very remote setting. Thus the importance of people in Calgary, Airdrie and vicinity, to check their properties, especially noting anything that looks unusual or disturbed.

There are many lakes, some small, some larger. Some are probably more recreational this time of year than others, but you know, it makes me even think of where he may have travelled with his family/parents as a youth. For example, did they enjoy camping as a family when DG and PG were younger? We know his parents likely have some kind of trailer or RV to still enjoy camping, because no one can picture 80-year-olds pitching tents, and during the first arrest, we were told his parents had gone camping. They may even have a permanent spot a few hours drive from the Airdrie acreage that they go to from time-to-time. Many of these places have lots of social activities for members and their families: weekly dances, and so forth.

So, there could be any number of spots that DG knows well, or came across at some point, and some probably are not even very frequented areas, and as the loner type, he may have explored further on his own, getting away from where most of the activity would take place. Teenage party spots to be included as someone mentioned in an earlier post, if the area hasn't since become developed.

I mean, there's even the scenario where someone could be building something, and will be pouring concrete (sorry for that visual). There's lots of building going on in and around Airdrie, just looking at the real estate there.

How can we know to what extent he went? Did he just dump the bodies, bury the bodies, burn, dismember, etc.? He is not going to tell anybody anything about the bodies, because he doesn't want them to be found. Unless someone can get through to him - his sister, and/or his parents - and what kind of relationship do they even have with him - we don't know. And then, one would assume he would have to have a conscience - and I'm sorry to say, I don't hold out too much hope there.

Not trying to be negative, just realistic.

LE will probably have a priority list that goes beyond the Airdrie property, just as they mentioned they were going to certain areas in the course of their investigation. And, I suspect, it will be based on information that is not available to us here, and perhaps from the 900 tips that came into them.

If any of his travels can somehow be reconstructed, on how far he may have went - maybe - but I still think it's a very big area to be covered. We really have to hope there's a connection somehow in his thinking to where he decided was the "right spot" to dispose of the bodies.

This would be the time IMO for LE to ask for the public's help in volunteering to cover some of these areas. A freshly dug spot for example is going to be more recognizable as such, sooner, rather than later. Also, to reveal if it's just the green truck that he drove, or if any other vehicle may have been used. That information if they have it, needs to be out there. AL's truck? The black SUV found on the Airdrie property, as examples.

Just my two cents.
 
May be useful, but, the truck was photographed at some point in daylight

Jmo

Given the shadows, I would put that at 4-4:30AM ... and I believe the photo could have been lightened and modified to make it easier for the public to recognize the truck.
 
One possibility is the LE found some DNA evidence at the acreage (greenhouse etc., since the friend of Dangeross reported it---however meticulous DG was, he must have left some trace of evidence), but that was not enough to prove death (e.g. victims' clothing and other personal items can also have their DNA). That is why LE need to analyze "piece by piece by piece by piece" all the evidence from everywhere to conclude the victims are no longer alive.
 
Would they find DNA evidences after that long? Or just the matter in witch they were killed?
 
I read this in the Toronto Sun this morning? Apologies if this has already been posted. I'm confused, does anyone know what this means?

"There (were) three people missing on Day 1," he said.

"We have to assume ... that someone, somewhere, was keeping one of those people alive ............
(more to read in link)

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/07/1...calgary-familys-disappearance-back-in-custody

Police had to assume during their investigation that one of the victims might be alive, to hold out some hope, but now that there is more evidence, police know that none of the victims is alive. There are no kidnapping charges, so there is no evidence that anyone was taken away from the crime scene alive.
 
Just an odd thought... Although I haven't looked really closely at any of the photos posted of AL and KL, given their age and 'generation' and the fact they were married, I would expect that both may be wearing wedding rings. KL appears to be fashionable in her photographs, and as such may have been wearing earrings and/or a necklace at the time of the crime. I am wondering if jewelry may be some of the found evidence?
 
How long will it be before the trial begins?

Well, it depends what the Alberta court system is like, and how backlogged they are. Having said that, and knowing this will be a high profile case, it could be anywhere from two to three years. It will also very much depend on how fast the disclosure comes out from the Crown's office, and I'm assuming our suspect will get lawyered up again quickly - possibly through legal aid. They will have volumes of disclosure, and that will all take time to trickle out. I don't see him getting bail this time around either. He breached his bail condition, and that pretty much takes care of that for DG, and I don't think anyone would stand up to try and bail him out anyway. So, it will also depend on how he elects to be tried (I don't picture him wanting to plead guilty). So, by a judge alone, judge and jury, etc. Trial dates will have to be set, but that can't happen until all the disclosure is received. I'd be very surprised if it was before the two year mark of being charged, but they just may make that happen, because the family will certainly be in agony until then, and then they'll have to prepare themselves to hear the details and all the evidence come out. One can hope too, that the bodies will be found before then.

Addendum: Oh, and because it was national news, they may of course be looking to hold it in a different court jurisdiction, where they might think it wasn't as well publicized or in the local news so much.
 
Is it possible they found evidence in the green Ford F-150?

It also looked pretty clean and shiny in the CCTV photos if it was driven on gravel roads to the property.
 
IMO I think this is foolish. I don't believe that civilians should be out and about traipsing in and around Airdrie looking for bodies. There's more to evidence collection and looking for bodies than just looking around willy-nilly. What if any of them come across something pertinent and it's not handled correctly and it jeopardizes the case? DG's lawyer would just love that, I'm sure. Big thumbs down for this idea.

I understand your point, but I disagree. I think time factors in here. The sooner the bodies can be found, the better the evidence will be, and not be affected by the elements, for example. They've met with the RCMP, and have obviously been given some direction on how to proceed, and what to do, and not to do. It may not be endorsed, but then if they really didn't want them to go ahead, they would tell them so. I think you gotta have more faith in people, and that they want to help, and can help, and will follow the direction that's been given. Plus, they're limiting where they're looking - culverts, ditches, etc. It would be no different than a couple out for a hike, who happen to discover a body or skeletal remains. Here, it would just be a group effort checking public spaces.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
161
Guests online
1,729
Total visitors
1,890

Forum statistics

Threads
600,669
Messages
18,111,821
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top