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

[ABro]

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.

Money takes time to come through so I'm not surprised that finances might be a concern in the short-term.

Also, fundraising is best done when an event is uppermost in people's minds. Donations drop off sharply when a story is no longer in the news.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

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/2014/08/14/douglas-garland-in-calgary-courtroom-today-on-liknes-obrien-murders

That caught my eye also, the use of the word slayings jumped out. Maybe it's just me, but I know the Merriam Dictionary says slaying means: 'to kill', but when I hear slaying I think stabbing for some reason. If they were shot, it would say 'shootings'. I imagine MSM doesn't know either way whether it's shootings/slayings, etc. but it's a word you don't see much these days. And questionable about the time mentioned in the article, the word 'evening' being used, makes you wonder if the crime happened between 10pm-midnight.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Money takes time to come through so I'm not surprised that finances might be a concern in the short-term.

Also, fundraising is best done when an event is uppermost in people's minds. Donations drop off sharply when a story is no longer in the news.

Thanks ABro, good perspective. Who am I to say, I can't imagine these families grief and I probably wouldn't be able to work for a very long time if ever myself. I think I'll stay out of the funding discussions like I was trying to lol! It's too easy to get judgmental and question motives of certain fundraising going on out there for victims nowadays be it crime victims or natural disasters, so sad.

 

[winnnancy]

Money takes time to come through so I'm not surprised that finances might be a concern in the short-term.

Also, fundraising is best done when an event is uppermost in people's minds. Donations drop off sharply when a story is no longer in the news.

Fundraising was debated ad nauseum in an earlier thread. I'll go back when I have time and add the link.
It was thread 10 starting post 18. Excellent insight post 126
Like many, I struggled through my own " perfect storm" and despite having had a horrible chapter in my life, I don't begrudge any amount of assistance to this poor family.
Just because I did it, doesn't mean they should have to.

ABro, I agree that corporate benefit packages are not what they appear to be on signing, lol
I suspect that they may receive a top up for a period of time but would otherwise be on EI I similarly structured government plan. EI offers wage replacement at 55% to a maximum salary of about 44k a year. Numbers wise, the can mean going from a take home of 1900.00 biweekly to about $800

Additionally, this is a young family. JO would have been on Maternity leave up to about a year ago and it is not uncommon to accumulate debt. ( reduced income)
RO declared bankruptcy, he may have been fulfilling his requirement.

We don't know what the situation is BUT Calgary is not cheap to live in.
It does not appear they've raised an inordinate amount of funds

 

[otto]

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

This information confirms that two of the three victims were murdered at the Parkhill house. There must be a lack of evidence regarding the third victim being murdered at the first crime scene, but given the second degree murder charges, maybe we can rule out kidnapping.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

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.

I agree that the timing seems a bit distasteful; I wonder why we feel that way about it? Many trust funds are set up the same day, or the next that a terrible situation/occurrence/accident, etc happens, certainly within the week. I'm just generally thinking about situations over the years so no links available. I've asked myself why this one bothers me so much and why I find it, IMO, almost embarrassing that there's so much talk on the family's behalf of these trust funds. I've never felt upset about Trust Funds being set up to help the families of crimes out...not at all. IMO, I feel that Cherri Hodgins information she provided yesterday was more of an appeal than the relaying of information regarding the new Trust Funds. There's usually one, maybe two for most cases...not 3-5. I'm very surprised that I'm feeling that way now. I know better than to judge a book by its cover, but IMO if you can almost immediately think to offer a $ 100,000 reward to find the missing threesome, then there must be some wherewithal to survive financially with the help of the many federally, provincially and municipally funded programs we have, as well as whatever employers may offer as support. This is not to begrudge the Liknes & O'Brien families the support and generosity of the kind-hearted public, by no means, I just feel a sense of urgency relayed about the family regarding requiring money. It gives one the feeling that the families are in dire straits, which may or may not be true, but the beseeching air that CH presented yesterday kind of turned me off a bit. As OutofTheDarkness mentioned yesterday in a previous post, many people have had traumatic events in their lives that they have had to deal with too. JMO

 

[Cherchri]

I have to agree on the beseeching air.... I mentioned the pair were talking to Nancy Hixt and another reporter yesterday. They actively sought her out. The pair were themselves very downtrodden/dishevelled and needy looking. I observed that his clothing did not fit, his eyes were rheumy, his fingernails dirty. I don't mean to be cruel, just stating what I observed and stating because the impact of my observation set my radar a little on edge. I did not know at the time who they were. It all "felt" a little off is what I am saying.

 

[ABro]

This information confirms that two of the three victims were murdered at the Parkhill house. There must be a lack of evidence regarding the third victim being murdered at the first crime scene, but given the second degree murder charges, maybe we can rule out kidnapping.

To me all it confirms is that the low-level employee at CPS charged with updating the crime map entered two murders.

 

[winnnancy]

To me all it confirms is that the low-level employee at CPS charged with updating the crime map entered two murders.

Perhaps media will pursue it at some point and it'll be corrected.

 

[Slebby]

Some thoughts on fundraising - imho...

When something this tragic occurs, people want to do something because they feel so helpless. Starting up a fund to assist the families financially is one of those things. The victims' families have multiple circles of community in which they live. In my case, my church community might rally behind me, as would my work friends. If it was my parents who were missing/murdered, my siblings have friends who might, with the best intentions, start up a fund as well. The various well-meaning individuals who start up these funds are not in communication with one another. Thus multiple funds are set up by different people. No nefarious plot, no "smoke and mirrors", just well-meaning friends trying to help out somehow.

Many people live paycheque to paycheque. To lose any income can jeopardize mortgage payments, car loan payments, and so on. Not every employer can afford to keep paying a non-productive employee. We run a small business, we could not keep up the paycheques to an employee unable to return to work during such a crisis.

As for the 100,000 dollar reward offered - I would offer a reward too if I was in their shoes. I may not have the money in the bank today, but I know I could borrow against my house and/or sell off some assets and pay it off in a timely manner if needed. I don't think this makes the reward offer suspect.

Just some thoughts in response to the money comments I have seen.

imho

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I agree that the timing seems a bit distasteful; I wonder why we feel that way about it? Many trust funds are set up the same day, or the next that a terrible situation/occurrence/accident, etc happens, certainly within the week. I'm just generally thinking about situations over the years so no links available. I've asked myself why this one bothers me so much and why I find it, IMO, almost embarrassing that there's so much talk on the family's behalf of these trust funds. I've never felt upset about Trust Funds being set up to help the families of crimes out...not at all. IMO, I feel that Cherri Hodgins information she provided yesterday was more of an appeal than the relaying of information regarding the new Trust Funds. There's usually one, maybe two for most cases...not 3-5. I'm very surprised that I'm feeling that way now. I know better than to judge a book by its cover, but IMO if you can almost immediately think to offer a $ 100,000 reward to find the missing threesome, then there must be some wherewithal to survive financially with the help of the many federally, provincially and municipally funded programs we have, as well as whatever employers may offer as support. This is not to begrudge the Liknes & O'Brien families the support and generosity of the kind-hearted public, by no means, I just feel a sense of urgency relayed about the family regarding requiring money. It gives one the feeling that the families are in dire straits, which may or may not be true, but the beseeching air that CH presented yesterday kind of turned me off a bit. As OutofTheDarkness mentioned yesterday in a previous post, many people have had traumatic events in their lives that they have had to deal with too. JMO

Human nature is a funny thing, and it's easy to get rubbed the wrong way about these types of things. I work in a large, unionized infrastructure with lots of employees and there was a time when a co-worker was seriously injured and had to be in the hospital a long time to heal (months), well a donation fund was set up that went around for people to donate for the injured person to get a laptop to keep said person occupied while bed ridden. Well, you have to imagine how people were 'rubbed the wrong way' when the said person makes double the wages (as does the spouse of the injured person) of some people asked who are on a single income (most with kids and on their own) and would kill for a laptop themselves! Just a story about how 'helping' people can make others who need help also question reasonings behind charities.

 

[otto]

In Alberta:

"If a person dies as the result of a crime, the maximum amount of death benefits that their family can receive is $12,500 per deceased victim."

http://www.victimsofviolence.on.ca/rev2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=389&Itemid=267

Six children plus Nathan's father: seven eligible for death benefits of $12,500 = $87,500. I wonder if siblings of the deceased are also eligible for the death benefit.

 

[ABro]

In Alberta:

"If a person dies as the result of a crime, the maximum amount of death benefits that their family can receive is $12,500 per deceased victim."

http://www.victimsofviolence.on.ca/rev2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=389&Itemid=267

Six children plus Nathan's father: seven eligible for death benefits of $12,500 = $87,500. I wonder if siblings of the deceased are also eligible for the death benefit.

That sum of money is per victim not surviving family member.

There are three victims. The money will be shared among their family members.

 

[goodasgold]

Not exactly. Was there a question prior to that information? If so, what was it?

Authorities have also scoured the property of Garland’s parents northeast of Airdrie and turned up no trace of any of the victims.

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/accused-in-liknes-and-o-brien-murders-in-court-1.1959334#ixzz3AQQs567H

I look at things for holes in the story. No trace of the victims, or no trace of the "murder case"? I think it's quite possible that there was evidence of the victims in the burn pit along the tree line near the South edge of the property ... clothing, anything else that was removed from the crime scene and which could tie back to the crime scene. It is a second crime scene for these murders. I interpret that comment as meaning that we can stop speculating that the victims were burned (with fire, lye, or acid) on the property.

Or perhaps there was no evidence of the victims ever at the acreage. Perhaps DG's tie to this murder lies in the Liknes house. LE never confirmed how many people or who the blood in the house belonged to. Just maybe if DG got hurt during the crime, his blood is also within the victims blood in the house. JMO

 

[deugirtni]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty in keeping up..... what are you talking about??

I have to agree on the beseeching air.... I mentioned the pair were talking to Nancy Hixt and another reporter yesterday. They actively sought her out. The pair were themselves very downtrodden/dishevelled and needy looking. I observed that his clothing did not fit, his eyes were rheumy, his fingernails dirty. I don't mean to be cruel, just stating what I observed and stating because the impact of my observation set my radar a little on edge. I did not know at the time who they were. It all "felt" a little off is what I am saying.

 

[deugirtni]

I'm not sure what you're talking about, but from what I read, the amount if $12,500 per deceased victim (BBM)

"If a person dies as the result of a crime, the maximum amount of death benefits that their family can receive is $12,500 per deceased victim."

Oops sorry, I see that ABro beat me to the punch!

In Alberta:

"If a person dies as the result of a crime, the maximum amount of death benefits that their family can receive is $12,500 per deceased victim."

http://www.victimsofviolence.on.ca/rev2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=389&Itemid=267

Six children plus Nathan's father: seven eligible for death benefits of $12,500 = $87,500. I wonder if siblings of the deceased are also eligible for the death benefit.

 

[LoisLane]

Fundraising was debated ad nauseum in an earlier thread. I'll go back when I have time and add the link.
It was thread 10 starting post 18. Excellent insight post 126
Like many, I struggled through my own " perfect storm" and despite having had a horrible chapter in my life, I don't begrudge any amount of assistance to this poor family.
Just because I did it, doesn't mean they should have to.

ABro, I agree that corporate benefit packages are not what they appear to be on signing, lol
I suspect that they may receive a top up for a period of time but would otherwise be on EI I similarly structured government plan. EI offers wage replacement at 55% to a maximum salary of about 44k a year. Numbers wise, the can mean going from a take home of 1900.00 biweekly to about $800

Additionally, this is a young family. JO would have been on Maternity leave up to about a year ago and it is not uncommon to accumulate debt. ( reduced income)
RO declared bankruptcy, he may have been fulfilling his requirement.

We don't know what the situation is BUT Calgary is not cheap to live in.
It does not appear they've raised an inordinate amount of funds

Hi! Just catching up... Have I missed something? RO also declared bankruptcy?

 

[Deleted member 117120]

I have to agree on the beseeching air.... I mentioned the pair were talking to Nancy Hixt and another reporter yesterday. They actively sought her out. The pair were themselves very downtrodden/dishevelled and needy looking. I observed that his clothing did not fit, his eyes were rheumy, his fingernails dirty. I don't mean to be cruel, just stating what I observed and stating because the impact of my observation set my radar a little on edge. I did not know at the time who they were. It all "felt" a little off is what I am saying.

If you were able to listen to the audio Cherchri I posted up thread yesterday of the couple you overheard in court we now know to be C Hodgins and her spouse both from Canmore, it was very interesting. What we do know now is that they were speaking on behalf of JO and RO and had their blessing so to speak to do so.

 

[Deleted member 117120]

Hi! Just catching up... Have I missed something? RO also declared bankruptcy?

Was wondering that as well LoisLane. Maybe a typo and meant AL. ??

 

[goodasgold]

Was wondering that as well LoisLane. Maybe a typo and meant AL. ??

I remember seeing in the very beginning of the search for these three that both KL and RO have gone bankrupt recently.