Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #11

[PrincessButtercup]

A ctv reporter posted a few tweets saying the Garlands were loved and supported, gave no sources and could very well been using the rev. as his source.

There was also one from someone in the community.

 

[ABro]

Why? (does it matter to you)

This is a grisly murder with very sympathetic victims. I can't see people coming forward to either support or pillory the Garlands. I just don't see it but maybe people do seek out media attention in these circumstances.

It matters to me because I believe it could provide insights into the accused.

People talk about murders for all sorts of reasons.

I can't imagine any news outlet that would turn down a story offering insights into Garland's living situation.

And, of course, the victims are sympathetic, but that doesn't make the Garlands less relevant.

 

[ABro]

There was also one from someone in the community.]

I was monitoring pretty closely in early days. Didn't catch it.

 

[stan laurel]

"He pleaded guilty to two drug-trafficking charges in January of 2000 and was sentenced to 39 months in jail, though in fact, because of the accelerated release program, he appears to have served only between six and 10 months."

http://o.canada.com/news/national/b...w-and-mental-health-concerns-documents-reveal

A couple of brain-bulbs went off with your post; one of the Globe & Mail reports lists the patent being filed by AL in 2000 (reporters make mistakes too).

Also, the meth that is now is different than the pre-2000 meth that contained ephedra (damn I can't remember the spelling). The two meths were quite different,, the later one was referred to as P-based. Like crack, the first street crack was from cocaine pressed with Kerosene,, the U.S DEA and such banned the sale of Kerosene to Columbia and the cocaine was later pressed with cheap gas. Drugs evolve in recipe as ingredients become more monitored, controlled or banned.

 

[stan laurel]

All DG would need to do is spend some time in a seedy bar and eventually he would see the right people to approach to sample his wares.

We keep thinking DG has no friends or connections but I think it could be that he does but they are other scumbags that would not be approaching the press to talk about their friend Doug.

If a gang member got arrested for murder do you think the other gang members would be contacting the press for interviews?

DG was stupid but not that stupid,, airdrie and north cowtown has its seedy elements but bars and the like are territory, you don't just get acquainted with the user set, there is protocol. if anything he would have been meeting with the level of distributor, even common dealer would be wrong in that business. he would have had to establish himself with a criminal nod/wink resume.

 

[stan laurel]

"Spun" - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0283003/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_25 reminds of meth every time. p.s. Mickey Rourke in this movie.

ephedrine,, in Canada most of the main ingredient can/could be found in Chinatown medicine shops. it's very rare now to have ephedrine based meth.

 

[winnnancy]

Do any examples come to mind?

We know Russell Williams and Bernardo went to school together.

 

[YYC Lady]

One more point from someone living in Calgary. With respect to the Winter Petroleum angle, folks may be reading a lot more into it than necessary. Oil companies get started up all the time. Many fail. From my peripheral involvement in multiple oil companies, I would suggest that, while the investors obviously go into it in the hopes of succeeding, they also know it's a gamble. It's part of the business culture here, and I don't think it's likely for such a failure to yield a murderous rage, IMHO.

If you are involved in the industry, around Calgary or elsewhere, I'd certainly like to know if you agree with me on this. Thoughts, anyone?

I fully agree with you. While I do believe motive might come back to business/patent dispute, I don't believe this is specifically about Winter. If so, it seems weird that ONLY AL would be targeted and not other senior managers. It doesn't seem like Winter had tons of high quality assets that investors would be feeling were not explored properly. JMO.

 

[stan laurel]

He would just need to know one person to sell it to in bulk. It's just like any other manufacturing. He could have even been approached by someone that knew he was a chemist and asked him or hired him to make meth. Then he was paid for his services and the guy who paid him broke it up into medium sized baggies and sold it to 10 people and those 10 people broke it up into 50 small baggies and sold it to a bunch of drug addicts in the bars and on the streets.

now you're getting it but distributors drive beemers and meet in nicer establishments. peddlers go to bars distributors meet at the Hilton.

 

[PrincessButtercup]

I was monitoring pretty closely in early days. Didn't catch it.

Check out @XFieldMomof3's Tweet: https://twitter.com/XFieldMomof3/status/486282999965573120

 

[Lalalacasbah]

WARNING GRAPHIC

Maybe the accused put all three victims in the back of his truck, drove to the acreage, backed his truck to the scorched earth pit that was under police tents, dumped bodies, returned to the crime scene for some reason (why?), poured muriatic acid on the bodies, burned the clothes, burned the bones over two days ... waited to see if he got caught.

If this was done (and other things mentioned), wouldn't LE have charged him with some sort of 'indignity to human remains' as well as murder charges?

 

[CanadianEh]

Respectfully, what is new in the investigation? Any new facts or information of note?

I've been reading pages and pages and pages of what looks like gossip.....

 

[winnnancy]

It matters to me because I believe it could provide insights into the accused.

People talk about murders for all sorts of reasons.

I can't imagine any news outlet that would turn down a story offering insights into Garland's living situation.

And, of course, the victims are sympathetic, but that doesn't make the Garlands less relevant.

Precisely. In an earlier thread, a poster raised the question of childhood.
Was it troubled? Was he abused? Was he delinquint? Are there juvi records? Had something occurred to prompt the move to Airdrie? Is there a reason for the moral fibre of DG?

A statement would provide insight into DG.
There was no expression of shock, sympathy to the victims families or tearful plea that that DG would be innocent because ....even a statement of sadness of the developments but he is our son and we stand by him but don't condone his behavior.

I can't imagine what they might be feeling but even from a perspective of keeping them safe in thier community (socially) I would have thought that either LE or the church would have guided such a move.

 

[ABro]

Check out @XFieldMomof3's Tweet: https://twitter.com/XFieldMomof3/status/486282999965573120

That's great. Thx so much.

 

[bakerlady]

Here is the murder codes for Canada to mull over for a bit. Some parts show how premeditation is NOT a requirement. I'm tired and it's a lot to take in so please chime in.

BBM

Classification of murder

231. (1) Murder is first degree murder or second degree murder.
Marginal notelanned and deliberate murder

(2) Murder is first degree murder when it is planned and deliberate. Possible but what about NO?
Marginal note:Contracted murder

(3) Without limiting the generality of subsection (2), murder is planned and deliberate when it is committed pursuant to an arrangement under which money or anything of value passes or is intended to pass from one person to another, or is promised by one person to another, as consideration for that other’s causing or assisting in causing the death of anyone or counselling another person to do any act causing or assisting in causing that death. If DG was a hitman
Marginal note:Murder of peace officer, etc.

(4) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder when the victim is
(a) a police officer, police constable, constable, sheriff, deputy sheriff, sheriff’s officer or other person employed for the preservation and maintenance of the public peace, acting in the course of his duties; n/a
(b) a warden, deputy warden, instructor, keeper, jailer, guard or other officer or a permanent employee of a prison, acting in the course of his duties; orn/a
(c) a person working in a prison with the permission of the prison authorities and acting in the course of his work therein.n/a
Marginal note:Hijacking, sexual assault or kidnapping

(5) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder in respect of a person when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under one of the following sections:
(a) section 76 (hijacking an aircraft);n/a
(b) section 271 (sexual assault);highly unlikely but possible
(c) section 272 (sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm);doubt the sexual assault part but can someone clarify the second part? would it be this if DG threatened to kill NO and ended up killing AL and KL as they were trying to defend him?
(d) section 273 (aggravated sexual assault);doubt it
(e) section 279 (kidnapping and forcible confinement); or Maybe this
(f) section 279.1 (hostage taking). This is makes most sense to me if DG killed AL and KL and took NO with him and kept him in his home, which also would explain the comment that someone left alive, there must have been evidence of that like DNA from a drinking cup, poop, pee, vomit, possibly in DG's home.
Marginal note:Criminal harassment

(6) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under section 264 and the person committing that offence intended to cause the person murdered to fear for the safety of the person murdered or the safety of anyone known to the person murdered. Possible. See below for section 264
Marginal note:Murder — terrorist activity

(6.01) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of a person, murder is first degree murder when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an indictable offence under this or any other Act of Parliament if the act or omission constituting the offence also constitutes a terrorist activity.
Marginal note:Murder — criminal organization

(6.1) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of a person, murder is first degree murder when
(a) the death is caused by that person for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a criminal organization; or gang/organized crime
(b) the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an indictable offence under this or any other Act of Parliament for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a criminal organization.
Marginal note:Intimidation

Intimidation

(6.2) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of a person, murder is first degree murder when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under section 423.1.This code is for media and journalists only so n/a
Marginal note:Second degree murder

(7) All murder that is not first degree murder is second degree murder. In considering the above requirements, how does NO fit into this category?

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-231.html

Section 264

Criminal harassment

264. (1) No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.
Marginal noterohibited conduct

(2) The conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of
(a) repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them; Truck seen several times
(b) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, the other person or anyone known to them;Possible
(c) besetting or watching the dwelling-house, or place where the other person, or anyone known to them, resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or Truck seen several times
(d) engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their family. Possible
Marginal noteunishment

(3) Every person who contravenes this section is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Marginal note:Factors to be considered

(4) Where a person is convicted of an offence under this section, the court imposing the sentence on the person shall consider as an aggravating factor that, at the time the offence was committed, the person contravened
(a) the terms or conditions of an order made pursuant to section 161 or a recognizance entered into pursuant to section 810, 810.1 or 810.2; or
(b) the terms or conditions of any other order or recognizance made or entered into under the common law or a provision of this or any other Act of Parliament or of a province that is similar in effect to an order or recognizance referred to in paragraph (a).
Marginal note:Reasons

(5) Where the court is satisfied of the existence of an aggravating factor referred to in subsection (4), but decides not to give effect to it for sentencing purposes, the court shall give reasons for its decision.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-264.html

 

[bakerlady]

now you're getting it but distributors drive beemers and meet in nicer establishments. peddlers go to bars distributors meet at the Hilton.

DG would be a manufacturer, not a distributor. manufacturers always make less. When you buy a new car who makes more money, the factory or the dealership?

 

[CentralAlberta]

Living on the small farm and looking after the annual crop might have provided him with a small income. Also, allowing a child to live at home seems different than financially supporting him. Perhaps that's splitting hairs, but other than room and board, were they really giving him pocket money for whatever he wanted?

I am 99% sure this is NOT a working farm. With only 40 acres it would be a losing proposition. It costs too much to run machinery, pay fertilizer, etc. if anything, I could see the land rented out but that's about it or maybe pasture. Besides everything was way too overgrown to be a working farm. MOO

 

[CentralAlberta]

One more point from someone living in Calgary. With respect to the Winter Petroleum angle, folks may be reading a lot more into it than necessary. Oil companies get started up all the time. Many fail. From my peripheral involvement in multiple oil companies, I would suggest that, while the investors obviously go into it in the hopes of succeeding, they also know it's a gamble. It's part of the business culture here, and I don't think it's likely for such a failure to yield a murderous rage, IMHO.

If you are involved in the industry, around Calgary or elsewhere, I'd certainly like to know if you agree with me on this. Thoughts, anyone?

I agree 100%. My husband and I lost most of our savings investing in a 'sure' bet in the oil field.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

A better quality photo of the tents/forensics set up in the corner of the property at Airdrie:


View attachment 55850


Close-up of the tents:

View attachment 55851


http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/G...lues+missing+persons+case/10007637/story.html

I'm probably off, but IIRC didn't they set up tents (not sure if the same place or in front of property more) for food/lunches for the searchers at one point?

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

How so please lead me through this, if you will?

All of this is pure speculation:

The post I was responding to was regarding possible defenses, and I said it depends what was found, if anything, in the truck or on the acreage.

Someone was speculating about self defence, challenging the evidence, and pleading not responsible due to mental illness (official term to be edited).

If all LE has is DNA evidence from the scene, and the video, you could challenge the conclusions made by prosecution. Even the perp's DNA can be explained away by an earlier visit to the estate sale.

Self defence is admitting you did it, and would be a stretch to explain defending yourself against a child.

If there was DNA from the victims discovered in the truck, or the acreage, combined with the video, the crime scene, and the history, it is a compelling case. Challenging the evidence could possibly work, but LE has learned much since the days of OJ, and DNA collection, control, and analysis has improved. Even if you could cast enough doubt on whether the victims are deceased or still alive, you'd still be tied to the disappearance. This is where the not criminally responsible due to mental illness defence needs to be looked at carefully. If all evidence points to guilty, then you need to look at the "whys". It would only be prudent to have a psych evaluation done, and go from there.

If there is not enough evidence, it's entirely possible there will be no need for a defence at all. Charges can be stayed at any point along the way.