Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #13

[Tinkerbel1]

Just how are these fund allocated anyway? Does someone have to sign for them, do they have an access to the bank account they are being put into? And if the family is in need now, how would they get that money? Can any family member just go and request funds? Or if someone becomes a spokesperson for the family would they be able to access the funds as they are deposited? I have no idea how these trust funds actually are dispersed.

I would think that a Trustee should handle trust funds. Or a lawyer? I'm not sure. I can't imagine that public money that was donated would be able to be just withdrawn without record of where it went?

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Fundraising should be discussed if there is a question about what is going on. There are several funds, and a woman has stepped forward to state that she will look after Kathryn's family. Who is part of that family, and which fund is set up for Kathryn, her two children and her husband - but which excludes his children from a previous marriage (as that's obviously not part of her family). Or, is Kathryn's friend looking after all of Alvin's extended family children too, and all funds will be divided by six? What exactly is happening with all the fundraising event funds? What happened to the auction proceeds from the Airdrie facebook search group?

It appears that the hint by the family that $100,000 was available in reward money was not actually available. It looks like that coincided with the day that the Obrien neighbour, Mr Head, started the online funding page ... trying to raise $100,000. Apparently the money is still needed, even though a reward is not.

Bingo!! That's the rub right there...the $ 100,000 reward money and the initial $ 100,000 trust fund, either very coincidental...or very synchronistic...JMO. Been bugging me since the 2nd or 3rd day of this investigation.

 

[birdlady2]

I would think that a Trustee should handle trust funds. Or a lawyer? I'm not sure. I can't imagine that public money that was donated would be able to be just withdrawn without record of where it went?

I have no idea about the funding through trusts into banks but the other types like the one set up by a friend, those funds can be sent by cheque or electronic payments I assume to whoever the fund was set up for or by. I mean, they must be able to access those funds within a short time I would think, as not everyone has a credit card to fall back on or savings and a person still has bills to pay and food etc to buy. Just one of those grey areas I have never looked into before.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

can someone show me the msm link that says they all died at the parkhill home? having a hard time finding it. thanks.

There isn't one, to my knowledge. The locations of certain events have been much debated and not confirmed... some still claim that no one is deceased.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I would think that a Trustee should handle trust funds. Or a lawyer? I'm not sure. I can't imagine that public money that was donated would be able to be just withdrawn without record of where it went?

I would imagine whoever opens an account can simply appoint themselves as the trustee, and advertise for donations. As for accountability as to where the money goes, I suspect there isn't much if any oversight or audits... it seems more or less like a freeforall.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

can someone show me the msm link that says they all died at the parkhill home? having a hard time finding it. thanks.

There isn't one, to my knowledge. The locations of certain events have been much debated and not confirmed... some still claim that no one is deceased.

Also, there is that map that LE has posted with the number of deaths at that address and there were 2. Maybe they've determined that the 3rd passed there as well since then. I can't find anything that says there were 3 there.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

I would imagine whoever opens an account can simply appoint themselves as the trustee, and advertise for donations. As for accountability as to where the money goes, I suspect there isn't much if any oversight or audits... it seems more or less like a freeforall.

Well, that's not good. Would there be a tax receipt issued for a donation to these trust funds? I know that I've received tax receipts for donating to 'Cause' fundraisers. If so, then I wonder if in fact there would have to be some accountability for the funds. Just a thought. How would one detect fraudulent activity with a trust fund set up for this situation. I could go set up a trust fund for the Liknes/O'Brien families, have the general public make deposits to it, appoint myself Trustee, then take off with that money before it was ever distributed to the Liknes/O'Brien families. That then becomes fraud. Who would know that I didn't give the money to the families? Not saying anyone is being fraudulent, not at all, but there must be some kind of checks and balances for these things. That's a little concerning to me.

Although I feel the same way about donating money at Christmas to places like the Christmas Bureau. I like to know my donation is going to someone who really needs it. I usually ask a local church or community if there is someone that needs help, then make up a hamper with food and gifts and make sure it is delivered where it is supposed to be going. Too many stories of people getting help when they're driving Mercedes...not that they may not help from time to time, but there are people that really need the help, that have nothing, and that's where I want my donations going. I guess that's a personal judgement call for everyone to make. JMO

 

[winnnancy]

Well, that's not good. Would there be a tax receipt issued for a donation to these trust funds? I know that I've received tax receipts for donating to 'Cause' fundraisers. If so, then I wonder if in fact there would have to be some accountability for the funds. Just a thought.

Charitable/ non profit companies are registered as such and thus are able to provide tax receipts for your donation. I'm not certain any of these trusts are being considered a charity rather a generous outpouring of support ? People are giving from the heart.

 

[wendiesan]

CTV News Calgary
Accused in
http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/accused-in-liknes-and-o-brien-murders-in-court-1.1959334
August 14 2014

Accused in Liknes and O'Brien murders in court
This is not an official transcript and is not connected to any of the participants.
This is a rough draft, and all errors are my own.

News Anchore = Tara Nelson = TN Reporter: Elissa Carpenter = EC Defence Lawyer = Kim Ross = KR Crown Prosecutor +Shane Parker = SP Family Friend = Cherri Hodgins

TN: Hello, and thank you for joining us.

The man accused of an horrific triple murder in Calgary has made another court appearance. It was brief, and a trial for Douglas Garland is still a long way off. That means there is a hard road ahead for family and friends left behind.

Elissa Carpenter reports.

EC: Once again, Douglas Garland appeared in court via CCTV from the Calgary Remand Centre. His appearance lasted only about a minute and a half.

KR: I understand I'll be receiving disclosure very shortly here, early next week.

EC: Disclosure refers to the evidence police have collected so far that could be used to prosecute Garland for murder.

SP: So, there's a fair bit of materials for him to go through. As you can appreciate, for the numbers of resources that were used by the police.

EC: Even though Garland's appearance was brief, it was long enough for Cherri Hodgins to lay eyes on the man accused of murdering her friend.

CH: I am Kathy's closest friend. She was my dearest friend in the whole world.

EC: Kathryn Liknes; her husband, Alvin Liknes; and their grandson, Nathan O'Brien, disappeared from the Liknes's southwest home on June 30th. Police believe all three were killed. Garland is a relative through marriage.

CH: Her family is in pieces. Nobody is working. Nobody can get back to normalcy, whatever normalcy means to us at this point. But, it's going to take a long time for us to be able to recover.

EC: The bodies of Nathan, Kathryn, and Alvin haven't been found. Garland will be tried with, or without, that evidence, but there's an even more important reason to find those remains. No memorial services have yet been held, and none are planned.

Douglas Garland will next appear in court next month. So far, his lawyer has not decided whether or not he will seek bail for Garland. He also hasn't determined whether or not he should ask the court to order a psychiatric evaluation. All of these things, he says, will be determined once he's seen that disclosure from the crown.

Elissa Carpenter, CTV News, Calgary.

 

[bakerlady]

can someone show me the msm link that says they all died at the parkhill home? having a hard time finding it. thanks.

That's because there isn't one. The Calgary crime map still lists 2 homicides at the Parkhill home. Not 3.

 

[Krystine]

[modsnip]

Not to be insensitive, but none of the family seem homeless or hard done by financially, and they are certainly not the only people to have suffered a loss of this type. I'm sure there are scam fundraisers linked to this case as well, so if you're unsure, donate nothing, or donate to your local children's hospice in their name.

It would never occur to me to profit from it. If someone did it on my behalf, I would ask them not to. If you detect a bit of repulsion with all this, you're right.

I agree. And I don't want to sound uncaring in any way. Money is not going to solve this one, the normal stages of grief, and loss, apply to this and every family that has been affected by violent death. Any kind of death, for that matter.

 

[PonderingNS]

I have looked on the missing main page but don't see anything for the gentleman now missing in Nova Scotia. Could someone plz start one ? Sorry but I don't know where else to put this and I don't know how . Thx
Here is a twitter link:
http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/#!/content/1.2736783

 

[Coldpizza]

I started one for him PonderingNS, thanks for bringing him to our attention.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Quebec-14-August-2014&p=10860544#post10860544

 

[deugirtni]

I noticed this in the linked newspaper article, and thought it was odd that the writer had written this bolded part below, BBM, ie does he know something nobody else has reported on, ie that the deaths took place between 10pm and midnight on the 29th, or is it just another instance of sloppy reporting?:

Garland, 54, is charged with two counts of first-degree murder in the June 29 slayings of Kathy and Alvin Liknes and one of second-degree murder in the death of their grandson, five-year-old Nathan O’Brien.

The trio were discovered missing the following morning when Nathan’s mom, Jennifer, arrived at the Liknes’ Parkhill home to pick up her son after a sleepover.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/08/14/douglas-garland-in-calgary-courtroom-today-on-liknes-obrien-murders

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Reverse engineer the logic... for a JOURNALIST to know, and confidently state that there was no forensic evidence belonging to the victims found at the acreage, that would mean someone high ranking or very knowledgeable in the investigation would have divulged that to them. Knowing they are a reporter and that it is going to be publicized, and thus let perp(s) know they found nothing, it is going to compromise any questioning of witnesses, suspects etc.

Ask yourself, is it likely that someone in LE would let that big a piece of information out? Would a reporter with a massive inside scoop simply use a 2 word blurb about it in a nothing article,
or would the headline be NOTHING FOUND AT GARLAND ACREAGE: DO POLICE HAVE THE WRONG MAN...

There is no question it is just a lazy choice of words to convey no complete, intact bodies were found.

One never knows. I keep remembering DG's perp walk and how the female news reporter was dogging DG each step of the way asking non-stop questions about where the bodies were and why he killed the Liknes' and NO. Reminded me of the celebrity paparrazi, IMO. I don't imagine it would be a far stretch of the imagination to think that perhaps said news reporter and/or others (certainly not all), would employ some of the same tactics (hiding behind a bush, asking LE to borrow a pen in order to get closer in, whatever) used by paparazzi to glean inside information. Perhaps something was overheard around the perimeter of the acreage, where other LE vehicles/personnel were situated. A leak is a leak, whether intentional or not. A story is a story, no matter I recall reading news articles that had tweets written by the journalist as to the blow-by-blow activity of LE while they were conducting their search of the acreage. I got the impression she literally sat in her vehicle (or hung around outside it) in order to watch everything that was going on, very much like a stormchaser would do. IMO it was distasteful and somewhat unprofessional. As far as the presentation of the lack of evidence goes, it would be quite irresponsible to write such a headline at this point. LE have indicated that there was evidence at the Parkview home of a quantity and/or quality, substantial enough to charge DG with murder. A statement regarding "no trace of the victims" at the acreage, would not erase the statement LE has made regarding the Liknes home, so such an article would be terribly irresponsible and incorrect. Wide open door for a lawsuit, IMO.

 

[LoriMcA]

I noticed this in the linked newspaper article, and thought it was odd that the writer had written this bolded part below, BBM, ie does he know something nobody else has reported on, ie that the deaths took place between 10pm and midnight on the 29th, or is it just another instance of sloppy reporting?:


http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/08/1...gary-courtroom-today-on-liknes-obrien-murders

I can't speak for the reporter and where they would get their exact date of the 29th except I did notice on the Calgary Crimes Map that the time & date for (2) homicides at the Parkhill location were:

2014/06/29 10:00PM

http://crimemap.calgarypolice.ca/

Maybe the reporter was basing it on that? I really couldn't say for sure but it's one possible explanation IMO.

 

[Sillybilly]

Uh...sorry sillybilly, your information is not correct. AL is not JO's father. Please note link below.

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/best...ces+amid+horrific+tragedy/10119216/story.html

Cherri Hodgins describes KL as a "single mother with a 6 week old daughter", then further goes on to say that she later met AL and had JL.

Thanks Tinkerbel !! I obviously need a refresher.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Were there any life insurance policies? Seems 6 weeks is about the right time for those to be coming through? Just wondering. Not to be rude, but there's too much "money stuff" in this whole case, IMO, seems kind of scandalous actually. And it doesn't end. There's one thing after another. Thought I would just ask the question, might as well get that over with too.

Agreed Tinkerbel1, there's so much money (and smoke and mirrors it seems) below the surface of this case. In my post I meant I think it's good for us WSer's to be discussing the money content and fundraising to an extent, I'm just surprised that the family and friends of the family are worried about finances and money at this time. After all options have been exhausted, then maybe they should be fundraising, but first things first, let's bring the victims home for a proper burial first. JMO.

 

[Salem]

Hi guys - just want to remind everyone that we don't discuss fundraising, whether or not one might be inclined to donate or post links to fundraising sites, without Management permission.

That's not our purpose here and there is no way to verify that any fundraising endeavor is legitimate.

Thanks,

Salem

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I believe someone posted this article link earlier, I meant to comment then forgot. I like this quote from DG's lawyer Kim Ross: '“He’s doing as good as can be expected in this situation. He’s anxious to see the disclosure also,” he said.' (BBM)

Interesting choice of words, that DG is anxious. Maybe he's going everything in his head to figure out where his plan went wrong, if he felt he planned a perfect crime.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...spect-makes-court-appearance/article20070677/

Another article snip it: "Ross said he does not believe police have tried to talk to Garland since shortly after his arrest, but he said there is nothing stopping them from going to the remand centre to do so." (BBM)

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/G...rance+hunt+trio+continues/10119082/story.html

So I wonder if LE have or haven't talked to him as stated earlier in the thread and reports(?)