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

[Ontario Mom]

I think part of the issue is that the police were basically saying thanks but please leave it to the professionals yet they were planning to continue with the search. Anyone who posted concern in that regard was attacked. They just weren't listening.

I wasn't aware police were saying thanks but no thanks. In that case, I understand but still, emotions are running high (understandably, this is such a horrible case) and tempers tend to flare. I just think everyone wants to help, contribute, bring closure and comfort in any way possible. To question the motives of people wanting to help just kind of stinks.

 

[Sillybilly]

Very happy to hear this. Despite their good intentions, civilian searchers could do more harm than good. I would hate for DG to get off because of some contaminated evidence because of this.

Evidence is evidence no matter how it is found or in what state it is found. Contamination by known searchers is easily ruled out.

 

[LayzeeDayzee]

Someone mentioned it last night, and it is a valid concerns for birds and small animals.

Sadly, however, thousands of green balloons (many with strings still attached) were released last night in Airdrie, Calgary, other places in Airdrie and around Canada - with absolutely no regard for the environment, even when people on various online groups organizing these balloon releases brought up the negative impact, they were met with rudeness, criticism, and utter disregard. It was even brought up last evening and the same kind of reaction was received. Sad, IMO.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I'd like to know what you guys think about my conjecture in post #838 (click link), in which I imagine DG went to L's house to pick up a piece of furniture, and asked AL to help carry it with him to his pickup truck.

Please read the complete post for details.

Seems to me consistent with everything we know so far (reason for pickup truck, Amber Alert's mentioning Nathan in company with his grandfather, and as another poster said, truck being in front of the house instead of the back, etc.).

The only thing that I can think of that makes this impossible is if DG and AL had not been on speaking terms at all these past years.

Anyone finds any inconsistency in my conjecture with what we know so far? (Definite inconsistency, rather than likelihood or unlikelihood)

I always say almost anything is possible. This might have happened but I do wonder if DG would've risked doing anything violent to AL inside his truck thus contaminating his truck with DNA evidence. It could be possible the DG did get AL outside the house 'to talk' or what not (similar to your theory), but with the confirmed struggle in the house it's hard to say what happened where.

I have a family member who worked in maximum security prisons his whole life and had to interview some of the worst criminals for a living and he always says 'what people don't know is, with these guys (violent criminals) all it takes is one good whack on the head to the victim and that's it, they have them, just like that'. These criminals are masters at surprising unsuspecting people. My family member also said 'these guys have lied their whole lives, so don't ever believe anything they say (makes me think of DG's traumatic car accident story).

 

[Menci]

I'm going to to bet that the other photos of DG's truck that night are more revealing than the one we were shown.

I've thought the same thing, but I do still question why they removed AL's truck? Only because of the mud, or was it also used?

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Sorry, according to what we were told, there is only one suspect, so your 4 perps example isit inconsistent with what we were told so far. There is nothing wrong with casually telling people DG was coming: no one would suspect DG was coming for a murder.

Think this through, and put yourself in the perp's head.

After they disappear, anyone they told that you were going to be there that night, will immediately share that with LE. It is basic common sense, if there is common sense to planning murder.

My 4 perp example was just that... An example... of how "consistent" isn't as strong a test as likely or plausible. Because of the lack of bodies, alien abduction is also consistent with what we know... However it is highly unlikely.

I'm certain you spent a lot of time on your theory, however, it's not productive to get tunnel vision about it. You asked for an opinion, and you received it.

 

[Weebles]

Just as police keep looking, and teams of volunteers keep looking, a family with every right to be paralyzed with grief is out looking, too.

Liknes says if the missing trio was indeed taken in the suspect’s old green pickup truck, as police allege, then there’s probably no need to stray far from easily accessed roads and the fields and ditches that run alongside them.

Liknes knows the truck in question, and he says it just wasn’t up to any serious distance driving or off-road excursions.

“It’s a piece of crap truck,” he says.

Still, he’s trying to arrange for a dirt bike or two to help cover ground the family’s pickups can’t easily access, just in case.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/07/17/relative-of-triple-homicide-victims-we-have-to-find-them

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I look at this man and I absolutely cannot believe that he killed little Nathan! Is there something wrong with me?

I would love for a miracle to happen and have that little boy alive still, I still can't process why he was a victim if assuming he didn't even know DG and assuming DG wasn't at family functions. Crushing

 

[ztzt]

I always say almost anything is possible. This might have happened but I do wonder if DG would've risked doing anything violent to AL inside his truck thus contaminating his truck with DNA evidence. It could be possible the DG did get AL outside the house 'to talk' or what not (similar to your theory), but with the confirmed struggle in the house it's hard to say what happened where.

I have a family member who worked in maximum security prisons his whole life and had to interview some of the worst criminals for a living and he always says 'what people don't know is, with these guys (violent criminals) all it takes is one good whack on the head to the victim and that's it, they have them, just like that'. These criminals are masters at surprising unsuspecting people. My family member also said 'these guys have lied their whole lives, so don't ever believe anything they say (makes me think of DG's traumatic car accident story).

Please, I repeat, do you find anything inconsistent with what we know so far, rather than unlikely? Inconsistent, meaning contradictory to what we have been told. You don't know what's in DG's mind so what he may or may not have though doesn't count in consistency/inconsistency. I would withdraw my theory if and only if it's not consistent with the facts known. Likelihood is highly subjective.

 

[Wendy101]

Well we know he didn't kill Nathan in the truck .. If he did..he'd be charged with murder 1 st.. So Nathan was killed somewhere else..

 

[ztzt]

After they disappear, anyone they told that you were going to be there that night, will immediately share that with LE. It is basic common sense, if there is common sense to planning murder.

Well, again, you don't know for sure they told someone about it.

Apparently you don't understand what inconsistency means.

 

[PrincessButtercup]

Well, again, you don't know for sure they told someone about it.

Apparently you don't understand what inconsistency means.

I think if you guys want to discuss semantics further you should do it by pm as to not hijack the discussion.

 

[ztzt]

Well we know he didn't kill Nathan in the truck .. If he did..he'd be charged with murder 1 st.. So Nathan was killed somewhere else..

First, I didn't say he definitely killed Nathan in the truck. Second, why killing him in the truck would make it first degree murder? He went to the house with the premeditation to kill the grandparents.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Please, I repeat, do you find anything inconsistent with what we know so far, rather than unlikely? Inconsistent, meaning contradictory to what we have been told. You don't know what's in DG's mind so what he may or may not have though doesn't count in consistency/inconsistency. I would withdraw my theory if and only if it's not consistent with the facts known. Likelihood is highly subjective.

None of us here on WS know what happened and might never know depending how much information is released to the public before, during and after a trial. I think we're all entitled to our theories though so don't withdraw your theory, you have a right to express what you think happened as much as the rest of us do!

 

[ztzt]

I think if you guys want to discuss semantics further you should do it by pm as to not hijack the discussion.

Conjecture about what happened that night is much more relevant to the topic than the protection of animals

 

[Weebles]

Global Calgary News 11pm
-Police spokesman said they want the volunteer search effort to continue
-Police said there were growing pains on organizing but are happy on how the mapping is done and that volunteers are reminded not to touch anything that may be evidence
-video of Nathan playing Timbit hockey
-talk about fundraising website and how it is meant to help the family

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Just as police keep looking, and teams of volunteers keep looking, a family with every right to be paralyzed with grief is out looking, too.

Liknes says if the missing trio was indeed taken in the suspect’s old green pickup truck, as police allege, then there’s probably no need to stray far from easily accessed roads and the fields and ditches that run alongside them.

Liknes knows the truck in question, and he says it just wasn’t up to any serious distance driving or off-road excursions.

“It’s a piece of crap truck,” he says.

Still, he’s trying to arrange for a dirt bike or two to help cover ground the family’s pickups can’t easily access, just in case.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/07/17/relative-of-triple-homicide-victims-we-have-to-find-them

That's some useful info, knowing that truck wasn't kept up for distance driving sets a bit of a limit geographically, even though it's still a vast search, I'm crossing my fingers these three can be brought to a resting place close to their family.

 

[LoisLane]

I don't know the date of the accident.. would it be possible it was during a break period or he had a semester off? He would have been 20 years old.

Do you have the date of the accident or obit.? I just have 1980.

 

[ztzt]

Liknes says if the missing trio was indeed taken in the suspect’s old green pickup truck, as police allege, then there’s probably no need to stray far from easily accessed roads and the fields and ditches that run alongside them.

Liknes knows the truck in question, and he says it just wasn’t up to any serious distance driving or off-road excursions.

“It’s a piece of crap truck,” he says.

We still haven't been told about that abandoned SUV.

I think we're all entitled to our theories though so don't withdraw your theory, you have a right to express what you think happened as much as the rest of us do!

My main point in that theory is, I don't think DG went there to argue about past dispute as some posters speculated. I think he made up some excuse to be there on rather friendly term, to keep them off-guard. If he went for dispute, did he make an appointment or just went without notice? Unlikely an appointment if it's going to be a hostile visit; but if without notice, the L's may not even open door for him.

 

[Wendy101]

If he was killed in the truck.. As he was being kidnapped is 1 st degree murder... No premed needed for this charge...
Also, i wasn't responding to your post.. I was just posting that at random..