Cherchri
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 924
- Reaction score
- 72
He had 5 days to go there Stan.
Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 June 2014 - #8
- Thread starter Sillybilly
- Start date
- Status
I agree. And, the other thought I had was the mountains. Canmore is accessible without a park pass, and there are plenty of hiking trails in and around the area.
Cherchri
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 924
- Reaction score
- 72
Oh my gosh it's me who's a silly billy. I have had all that fixed in my mind as having happened when he was in BC. Helps to read sometimes n'est pas!
OutOfTheDarkness
Former Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 1,525
- Reaction score
- 2
LE has to follow the evidence, and at that time, we could assume there wasn't enough evidence to indicate anyone was deceased, therefore, they operate under the assumption it's a missing persons case.
The events of the evening didn't change at all. However, as the evidence comes in, and pieces of the story can be built, then the reality of what happened, rather than previous suppositions, become the true story.
Cherchri
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 924
- Reaction score
- 72
I'm thinking Drumheller because the company that holds the patent that the dispute was over is demarcated on a map there. I posted a link for that a few moments ago. That, coupled with the fact that it's a giant dinosaur graveyard might fit the twisted mindset as a hard to uncover burial place. What do you think?
LoriMcA
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2008
- Messages
- 542
- Reaction score
- 4
I added to my previous post btw with a link back to the thread with the article & obituaries...
I've scoured the net trying to find any link...any hint....All I can think of is little Nathan's poor family....A&K's entire family..even DG's parents...who have been through enough I'm sure with all this 'past' of his they've dealt with....so many people affected...close family...complete strangers....I just want them found and brought home...they just have to be found...
stan laurel
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 891
- Reaction score
- 0
I think the idea that DG is obsessive compulsive is wrong, meticulous yes, but not OC. To be honest, if DG were to research abductions and what NOT to do, this website would be the place to look for such ideas. He's very lateral thinking (if you read his argument for collecting E.I and winning the case). My guess is that if he's a hunter/fisherman, he dumped the remains in Ghost Reservoir, which is deep and always moving, and it's not far from Airdrie if you know the roundabout way.
his case on employment insurance; http://caselaw.canada.globe24h.com/...2005/03/03/garland-v-m-n-r-2005-tcc-176.shtml
Ghost Lake; 51.224872, -114.713798
his case on employment insurance; http://caselaw.canada.globe24h.com/...2005/03/03/garland-v-m-n-r-2005-tcc-176.shtml
Ghost Lake; 51.224872, -114.713798
wendiesan
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
- Messages
- 3,362
- Reaction score
- 10
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...than-o-brien-kathy-and-alvin-liknes-1.2707268
Transcript of Interview regarding Douglas Garland charges.
This is a rough draft of the transcript, it is not an official transcript.
It is not connected with any of the participants.
Any errors are my own.
Kevin Bryan = KB
Anchor: Our next guest says prosecuting a multiple homicide case without human remains presents some challenges.
Kevin Bryan was a forensic detective with the York Regional Police in Ontario for sixteen years until his retirement in 2011, and Kevin Brian joins us now, so thank you for your time here. When we are talking about a case where there are murder charges but no bodies, how difficult is that to do?
KB: It can be very difficult. However, the police are not laying these charges without extensive consolation with the prosecutors in this case, so I'm pretty confident that they have information, evidence that two things. Number one, all three of the missing parties are deceased. And, number two, that the accused is the one responsible for these homicides. Otherwise, there would not--even though we're missing the bodies--no charges would be laid until that evidence exists.
What evidence might that be? I would anticipate or suspect that there was some blood at the scene, at their--if the police are releasing information that there was, in fact, a struggle at the scene. So I would imagine that DNA would have been gleaned from the scene. Maybe from one of the missing persons, maybe from all three of the missing persons.
Blood spatter evidence would have been, a blood spatter expert would have been attended to the residence of the Liknes home and done an analysis there to determine what may have been caused, what may have caused the deaths of these three people. If, in fact, that's where the homicides took place. Although it might just have been a struggle, the persons abducted and then killed somewhere else.
Anchor: Why lay charges now, though? If, we know Douglas Garland was arrested, and charged in a case that had nothing to do with the disappearance of the Likneses and Nathan O'Brien. He was released on Friday, and then he's arrested a few days later. So, is there something with that timing?
KB: There may be. The actual initial arrest could have been on the unrelated charges. The evidence was not there at that time for them to proceed with the charges. Was he released from custody on a bail? I'm sure as soon as he was released that surveillance was put upon this person. He would have been the subject of both physical surveillance -- in other words, a surveillance team following him around as well as electronic surveillance. I have--from working previous cases-- I have no doubt that that took place. Did he go somewhere? Did he do something in that two days, or three days that he was out of custody that actually secured that last piece of evidence that the police needed to move forward to with the charges.
The police aren't gonna tell us that, and we're not gonna know that, unfortunately maybe not until the trial, because I don't suspect the bail hearing will--there'll be a publication ban on that as well as the preliminary hearing if in fact there is one, of course. So, we may not know what the information is for some time.
Anchor: He is accused of these crimes, so police believe that he's committed them. He would know where the bodies are then. How do they get that information from the accused?
KB: The accused is under no obligation to tell them, OK, so how would they get that information? It might be through some search warrants. Now that he's been arrested, they may be able to now access search warrants that they weren't able to get prior to enough evidence being obtained to show that there is reasonable grounds to think he committed those offences. So, with search warrants of his cellular phone, assuming he has one, most everybody does, maybe a GPS tracker in his vehicle, that type of thing, they may, may be able to follow the paths of his cell phone previous and the activity around the time of the abduction or removal of the bodies and locate them there. Other than that they're gonna have to hope he comes up and confesses as to where they are. And watching him on TV, fthat might be unlikely.
Anchor: Mmhmm, mmhmm. Is there something that could be offered to him to for instance for him to be involved, to actually help them find the body?
KB: There could be. I mean there's, there's always a chance of a , there's always the chance of a plea bargain being arranged at some later date to tell where the bodies are. There, there-- It's nothing we'd want to hear about.it's nothing we want to hear about, it's nothing we want to see happen. But it certainly could be. You know, he might plead guilty to three, three counts of second degree murder instead of first degree murder.
I mean, to lay a, to lay a charge of first degree murder--I mean, that tells us right away and especially it's kind of unusual they would lay two counts of first degree and one count of second degree. That's kind of unusual. Which tells me, I , we could speculate a little bit that one of two things happened.
When he went there, it's assumed that the police theory is that he went there that night to abduct and murder the two, the couple, not expecting to find the grandson, Nathan there, and so there was no premeditation with regards to the murder of Nathan. Secondly, first degree murder is also a--there's a schedule of offences that if a homicide takes place during the commission of these offences, first degree murder is a proper offence. One of them is kidnapping and the other one is forcible confinement. That's another one. There's. there's some others too, but those are two.
So, maybe there was forcible confinement of the couple, however they took their grandson with them. There was really no forcible confinement there. That's why it was a second degree murder charge. So it's very unusual that the charges are laid two counts of first and one of second. Especially without the bodies.
And the bodies hold so much of the evidence. Their gonna hold the time of death, or some information which may lead to the time of death. And, more important, the cause of death. How did these people die?
Now there may be blood spatter evidence at the scene, at the Liknes home, or in the vehicle or some other location tied to Garland that can tell them the cause of death, the weapon that was used through the blood spatter evidence. That is possible as well.
Anchor: But the bodies would help.
KB: But the bodies hold so much of the evidence. It's very dramatic not to have the bodies and to try and proceed.
Anchor: OK, Kevin. Thank you for your insight. We appreciate it. Kevin Bryan, retired forensic detective with York Regional Police here in Ontario.
Transcript of Interview regarding Douglas Garland charges.
This is a rough draft of the transcript, it is not an official transcript.
It is not connected with any of the participants.
Any errors are my own.
Kevin Bryan = KB
Anchor: Our next guest says prosecuting a multiple homicide case without human remains presents some challenges.
Kevin Bryan was a forensic detective with the York Regional Police in Ontario for sixteen years until his retirement in 2011, and Kevin Brian joins us now, so thank you for your time here. When we are talking about a case where there are murder charges but no bodies, how difficult is that to do?
KB: It can be very difficult. However, the police are not laying these charges without extensive consolation with the prosecutors in this case, so I'm pretty confident that they have information, evidence that two things. Number one, all three of the missing parties are deceased. And, number two, that the accused is the one responsible for these homicides. Otherwise, there would not--even though we're missing the bodies--no charges would be laid until that evidence exists.
What evidence might that be? I would anticipate or suspect that there was some blood at the scene, at their--if the police are releasing information that there was, in fact, a struggle at the scene. So I would imagine that DNA would have been gleaned from the scene. Maybe from one of the missing persons, maybe from all three of the missing persons.
Blood spatter evidence would have been, a blood spatter expert would have been attended to the residence of the Liknes home and done an analysis there to determine what may have been caused, what may have caused the deaths of these three people. If, in fact, that's where the homicides took place. Although it might just have been a struggle, the persons abducted and then killed somewhere else.
Anchor: Why lay charges now, though? If, we know Douglas Garland was arrested, and charged in a case that had nothing to do with the disappearance of the Likneses and Nathan O'Brien. He was released on Friday, and then he's arrested a few days later. So, is there something with that timing?
KB: There may be. The actual initial arrest could have been on the unrelated charges. The evidence was not there at that time for them to proceed with the charges. Was he released from custody on a bail? I'm sure as soon as he was released that surveillance was put upon this person. He would have been the subject of both physical surveillance -- in other words, a surveillance team following him around as well as electronic surveillance. I have--from working previous cases-- I have no doubt that that took place. Did he go somewhere? Did he do something in that two days, or three days that he was out of custody that actually secured that last piece of evidence that the police needed to move forward to with the charges.
The police aren't gonna tell us that, and we're not gonna know that, unfortunately maybe not until the trial, because I don't suspect the bail hearing will--there'll be a publication ban on that as well as the preliminary hearing if in fact there is one, of course. So, we may not know what the information is for some time.
Anchor: He is accused of these crimes, so police believe that he's committed them. He would know where the bodies are then. How do they get that information from the accused?
KB: The accused is under no obligation to tell them, OK, so how would they get that information? It might be through some search warrants. Now that he's been arrested, they may be able to now access search warrants that they weren't able to get prior to enough evidence being obtained to show that there is reasonable grounds to think he committed those offences. So, with search warrants of his cellular phone, assuming he has one, most everybody does, maybe a GPS tracker in his vehicle, that type of thing, they may, may be able to follow the paths of his cell phone previous and the activity around the time of the abduction or removal of the bodies and locate them there. Other than that they're gonna have to hope he comes up and confesses as to where they are. And watching him on TV, fthat might be unlikely.
Anchor: Mmhmm, mmhmm. Is there something that could be offered to him to for instance for him to be involved, to actually help them find the body?
KB: There could be. I mean there's, there's always a chance of a , there's always the chance of a plea bargain being arranged at some later date to tell where the bodies are. There, there-- It's nothing we'd want to hear about.it's nothing we want to hear about, it's nothing we want to see happen. But it certainly could be. You know, he might plead guilty to three, three counts of second degree murder instead of first degree murder.
I mean, to lay a, to lay a charge of first degree murder--I mean, that tells us right away and especially it's kind of unusual they would lay two counts of first degree and one count of second degree. That's kind of unusual. Which tells me, I , we could speculate a little bit that one of two things happened.
When he went there, it's assumed that the police theory is that he went there that night to abduct and murder the two, the couple, not expecting to find the grandson, Nathan there, and so there was no premeditation with regards to the murder of Nathan. Secondly, first degree murder is also a--there's a schedule of offences that if a homicide takes place during the commission of these offences, first degree murder is a proper offence. One of them is kidnapping and the other one is forcible confinement. That's another one. There's. there's some others too, but those are two.
So, maybe there was forcible confinement of the couple, however they took their grandson with them. There was really no forcible confinement there. That's why it was a second degree murder charge. So it's very unusual that the charges are laid two counts of first and one of second. Especially without the bodies.
And the bodies hold so much of the evidence. Their gonna hold the time of death, or some information which may lead to the time of death. And, more important, the cause of death. How did these people die?
Now there may be blood spatter evidence at the scene, at the Liknes home, or in the vehicle or some other location tied to Garland that can tell them the cause of death, the weapon that was used through the blood spatter evidence. That is possible as well.
Anchor: But the bodies would help.
KB: But the bodies hold so much of the evidence. It's very dramatic not to have the bodies and to try and proceed.
Anchor: OK, Kevin. Thank you for your insight. We appreciate it. Kevin Bryan, retired forensic detective with York Regional Police here in Ontario.
wendiesan
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
- Messages
- 3,362
- Reaction score
- 10
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...than-o-brien-kathy-and-alvin-liknes-1.2707268
Douglas Garland arrives handcuffed at processing centre. Through the questions, DG walks towards then into the centre.
This is a rough draft of the transcript, it is not an official transcript.
It is not connected with any of the participants.
Any errors are my own.
Reporter: Mr. Garland, can you tell us what happened to Nathan O'Brien and his grandparents?
DG silent
Reporter: Can you tell us where they are?
DG silent
Reporter: Do you plan to help police find Nathan O'Brien and return him to his parents?
DG silent
Reporter: Do you have anything at all that you'd like to say?
DG silent
Reporter: Mr. Garland, do you want to make any comment?
DG silent
Reporter: Mr. Garland, do you have anything you want to say to Nathan O'Brien's parents?
Where is Nathan O'Brien?
DG silent
Reporter: Do you have any comment?
DG silent
Douglas Garland arrives handcuffed at processing centre. Through the questions, DG walks towards then into the centre.
This is a rough draft of the transcript, it is not an official transcript.
It is not connected with any of the participants.
Any errors are my own.
Reporter: Mr. Garland, can you tell us what happened to Nathan O'Brien and his grandparents?
DG silent
Reporter: Can you tell us where they are?
DG silent
Reporter: Do you plan to help police find Nathan O'Brien and return him to his parents?
DG silent
Reporter: Do you have anything at all that you'd like to say?
DG silent
Reporter: Mr. Garland, do you want to make any comment?
DG silent
Reporter: Mr. Garland, do you have anything you want to say to Nathan O'Brien's parents?
Where is Nathan O'Brien?
DG silent
Reporter: Do you have any comment?
DG silent
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,403
- Reaction score
- 117,691
It's understandably confusing. I just jumped on the date because i have them etched in my brain from doing timelines. I can rhyme off dates from timelimes I did 3 years ago ... but most days I can't remember where I put my darn glasses
LoriMcA
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2008
- Messages
- 542
- Reaction score
- 4
Was out in Drumheller last summer...had never been and my son who lives in Alberta said...we HAVE to go...so go we did.....it is vast...haunting...desolate.....and not 'that' far a drive from Calgary/Airdrie either....If someone wanted to hide someone or something....that would definitely be a consideration....good gravy....where to start ...needle in a haystack for sure... I don't like thinking about all the cases where the only way someone is found is years later & a hunter or hiker happens by chance.....I really don't want to think about that....
Found a little more details about the circumstance of the car accident that killed Matthew Hartley and his sister--although, the sometimes meaningless wording of this page seems to suggest it's the result of some transcription:
Man questioned in disappearance of Nathan OBrien charged with possessing
MISSOURI NEWS July 8, 2014
--------- Quote ----------
Douglas Garland was vital in B.C.s Lower Mainland and operative as a chemical mixer during a B.C. Institute of Technology.
He had managed to hedge showing by hidden Matthews identity.
The teen was during a circle of a automobile nearby his familys plantation in Cardston, about 3½ hours south of Calgary, when he strike a half-ton truck. His sister, Jill Lorene Hartley, 12, who was roving with him was also killed.
The siblings are buried together in a Church of Latter Day Saints cemetery.
------- End quote -------
Someone early on (also in Thread #4 I believe) found a newspaper clipping that had a small news item about this car accident and also mentioned the other vehicle was a half-ton truck, and I think it was called a head-on collision.
Edit: Ha, turns out, this must be some kind of machine translation of the article linked in #693 by Jackie87.
Man questioned in disappearance of Nathan OBrien charged with possessing
MISSOURI NEWS July 8, 2014
--------- Quote ----------
Douglas Garland was vital in B.C.s Lower Mainland and operative as a chemical mixer during a B.C. Institute of Technology.
He had managed to hedge showing by hidden Matthews identity.
The teen was during a circle of a automobile nearby his familys plantation in Cardston, about 3½ hours south of Calgary, when he strike a half-ton truck. His sister, Jill Lorene Hartley, 12, who was roving with him was also killed.
The siblings are buried together in a Church of Latter Day Saints cemetery.
------- End quote -------
Someone early on (also in Thread #4 I believe) found a newspaper clipping that had a small news item about this car accident and also mentioned the other vehicle was a half-ton truck, and I think it was called a head-on collision.
Edit: Ha, turns out, this must be some kind of machine translation of the article linked in #693 by Jackie87.
stan laurel
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 891
- Reaction score
- 0
True, but it's also really trying terrain and there are so many visitors to almost any stretch at this time of year that it would be very hard to be discreet. He would also know that farmland/farmers are also quite meticulous and have their eyes on the field at all times.
Good idea. I think that he may be smart enough to find a hiding place which is in no way associated with him. He's a criminal and thinks like one( though looking at all the convictions - not a successful one)
It would not be surprising that he could harm a child.
With a lack of morality and no child of his own....
My heart is breaking for Nathan, I pray for him and that his parents find peace
LoriMcA
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2008
- Messages
- 542
- Reaction score
- 4
LoriMcA
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2008
- Messages
- 542
- Reaction score
- 4
I went back and found the clippings post ztzt...I added the link to my post on the page before this one *page 28 near the bottom*....if you were wanting to read the article
Cherchri
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 924
- Reaction score
- 72
Ha ha ha! I see there were two crimes he committed in BC so I guess he was charged with everything there and then brought back to Alberta for trial. I think I might need some glasses.
I went back and found the clippings post ztzt...I added the link to my post on the page before this one *page 28 near the bottom*....if you were wanting to read the article
:thumb: There is obviously the need to keep some important posts and authentic documents in an easily referenced place.
- Status