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

[OutOfTheDarkness]

It was a TD bank card and they did not become TD until 2008.

It was actually 1955.

We don't know if it was old or new ID for certain. Since he was already charged with the MH impersonation previously, and that the old ID would have been long expired and worn, it's more likely the new charges would stem from a new attempt at impersonation.

 

[deugirtni]

I doubt if LE would have returned illegally obtained ID/credit/debit cards upon his release, however I wonder if, even though LE and the courts knew about this identity theft, they somehow failed to notify or have it posted on the Credit Bureau records? Or perhaps the bank failed to check the Credit Bureau records if he applied for a bank card/account under that name? I have in the past read newspaper articles about minors successfully applying for credit cards, and also others successfully applying under the name of someone deceased. I guess if one fills out an application, it could potentially just go through without any checking, and then would not really be brought to light unless/until something unexpected happened, like not paying the bills or something?

I had assumed that when he was arrested and put in jail for having false identity documents that those documents were confiscated. Perhaps the police put the false papers amongst his belongings when he was put in jail and returned them to him when he was released.

 

[deugirtni]

Yes, the purpose of my comment irt DG being anxious possibly because he is innocent, was just to add a different perspective for those that may assume that he is anxious because he is guilty. Either way, imho, I think it is normal for one to be anxious in those circumstances and one can not read into that as being an indication of either guilt or innocence.

The indication by DG's lawyer that he is anxious to see the LE disclosures/evidence does not suggest that this simply is a behavior indicative of innocence.
I can tell you that I have a friend who is a Psychologist and has worked in the past at a high security prison in Canada (where Paul Bernardo was but has since been relocated due to closure of prison). As a Psychologist working in the prison, you are privy to sessions with inmates and I can tell you that criminals love to talk about their crimes in minute details for perverse satisfaction. It could simply be that suspect wants to relive the experience as unfathomable as it would seem to us. As well, it could also be a strategy for suspect in moving forward with the defense.

 

[wendiesan]

Not my point at all and I'm sure it was clear. A private room would prevent family from having to run the gauntlet with public and media. I know some courthouses have the facility and I shared the example. JO was in the building on Thursday but not in the courtroom. I wonder why she would go to the trouble of getting there and not attend so assume there was somewhere private for her to wait and possibly watch the proceedings as well

Were you thinking something like a smaller office space with CCTV or a viewing room with two-way see through surveillance mirrors or something similar so victims could look directly into the courtroom? I was looking for something already designated for the use you're describing but hadn't yet found a room with a name that suggested it was reserved for such use. Do you think the Elizabeth Fry or John Howard societies, or Victim Services might have something like that? I was looking for something already designated for that use, and just hadn't found it yet. Maybe the Crown Prosecutors office or the offices of Security has such a space for such a use, but haven't given it a title. I assumed that there would be a room or a suite like that in a new building such as the Calgary Courts Centre.

 

[deugirtni]

So I guess I am confused. If someone is innocent, then would they really need to see the disclosure before deciding to plead not guilty? I just think it is odd, imho, that there has been no claim from the accused's lawyer that the accused will be pleading not guilty and that he will be defending him vigorously. Am I reading too much into that?

After the hearing on Aug 14, the prosecutor briefly spoke with the media. He said that the investigation in Mexico is done.

The defence needs the discovery related to the arrest in order to understand why the client was arrested. It will lay out the evidence against the accused. After learning what the police know, the accused will make a decision whether it's in his best interests to plead guilty, not guilty, or to attempt to make a plea deal. I think it's just as well that the defence lawyer is not grandstanding.

 

[kdgdid]

It was my understanding that LE are looking at DG in other unsolved cases but her name was specifically used in the article.

Was it mentioned because it remains an unsolved case, where others are not?

 

[otto]

I doubt if LE would have returned illegally obtained ID/credit/debit cards upon his release, however I wonder if, even though LE and the courts knew about this identity theft, they somehow failed to notify or have it posted on the Credit Bureau records? Or perhaps the bank failed to check the Credit Bureau records if he applied for a bank card/account under that name? I have in the past read newspaper articles about minors successfully applying for credit cards, and also others successfully applying under the name of someone deceased. I guess if one fills out an application, it could potentially just go through without any checking, and then would not really be brought to light unless/until something unexpected happened, like not paying the bills or something?

I agree. Upon arrest for using false identification documents, they would have been confiscated. I think the only explanation for the accused having false identification documents in 2014 is if he applied for those documents after his release from jail. That is a very bold thing to do, but he did it, he got away with it, and I suspect that he was smug about having gotten away with it again.

 

[otto]

So I guess I am confused. If someone is innocent, then would they really need to see the disclosure before deciding to plead not guilty? I just think it is odd, imho, that there has been no claim from the accused's lawyer that the accused will be pleading not guilty and that he will be defending him vigorously. Am I reading too much into that?

It seems that defence counsel has decided not to make statements to the media ... more credit to him.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

So I guess I am confused. If someone is innocent, then would they really need to see the disclosure before deciding to plead not guilty? I just think it is odd, imho, that there has been no claim from the accused's lawyer that the accused will be pleading not guilty and that he will be defending him vigorously. Am I reading too much into that?

In an ideal world yes, the innocent would scream from the rooftops and immediately proclaim their innocence in court. However, innocent people have been convicted in this world, and his lawyer is doing his due diligence by following proper procedure and protocol.

If they have absolutely nothing on him, they could work out a staying of the charges without the need for a plea. Something LE thinks damning in the evidence perhaps could be easily refuted and proven otherwise, like with an alibi, and the case falls apart.

You can read it both ways. It may just be the lawyer's personal style to be low key and not bombastic, regardless of guilt or innocence.

 

[otto]

In an ideal world yes, the innocent would scream from the rooftops and immediately proclaim their innocence in court. However, innocent people have been convicted in this world, and his lawyer is doing his due diligence by following proper procedure and protocol.

If they have absolutely nothing on him, they could work out a staying of the charges without the need for a plea. Something LE thinks damning in the evidence perhaps could be easily refuted and proven otherwise, like with an alibi, and the case falls apart.

You can read it both ways. It may just be the lawyer's personal style to be low key and not bombastic, regardless of guilt or innocence.

"Ross said a decision on whether to seek bail or a psychiatric assessment won’t be made until after he’s had a chance to review the evidence."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...spect-makes-court-appearance/article20070677/

 

[Cherchri]

Were you thinking something like a smaller office space with CCTV or a viewing room with two-way see through surveillance mirrors or something similar so victims could look directly into the courtroom? I was looking for something already designated for the use you're describing but hadn't yet found a room with a name that suggested it was reserved for such use. Do you think the Elizabeth Fry or John Howard societies, or Victim Services might have something like that? I was looking for something already designated for that use, and just hadn't found it yet. Maybe the Crown Prosecutors office or the offices of Security has such a space for such a use, but haven't given it a title. I assumed that there would be a room or a suite like that in a new building such as the Calgary Courts Centre.

Yes indeed. I would love to know if there is such a facility. It seems it would be the kindest way of accommodating family members of victims and accused. Just a small private room with a CCTV link to the courtroom. The Calgary building, housing the various courts is hugely impressive and thoughtfully designed. I see there is an Aboriginal room designated so anything is possible.

 

[Deleted member 117120]

Yes, the purpose of my comment irt DG being anxious possibly because he is innocent, was just to add a different perspective for those that may assume that he is anxious because he is guilty. Either way, imho, I think it is normal for one to be anxious in those circumstances and one can not read into that as being an indication of either guilt or innocence.

Agreed deugirtni, in either scenario quite expected to want to see the evidence against oneself.

 

[deugirtni]

I can't help feeling that that decision is a dis-service to the accused, if he is innocent, imho.

It seems that defence counsel has decided not to make statements to the media ... more credit to him.

In an ideal world yes, the innocent would scream from the rooftops and immediately proclaim their innocence in court. However, innocent people have been convicted in this world, and his lawyer is doing his due diligence by following proper procedure and protocol.

If they have absolutely nothing on him, they could work out a staying of the charges without the need for a plea. Something LE thinks damning in the evidence perhaps could be easily refuted and proven otherwise, like with an alibi, and the case falls apart.

You can read it both ways. It may just be the lawyer's personal style to be low key and not bombastic, regardless of guilt or innocence.

 

[deugirtni]

Can you imagine.. a room filled with only families of both victims and accused, all together?

Yes indeed. I would love to know if there is such a facility. It seems it would be the kindest way of accommodating family members of victims and accused. Just a small private room with a CCTV link to the courtroom. The Calgary building, housing the various courts is hugely impressive and thoughtfully designed. I see there is an Aboriginal room designated so anything is possible.

 

[Deleted member 117120]

Yes indeed. I would love to know if there is such a facility. It seems it would be the kindest way of accommodating family members of victims and accused. Just a small private room with a CCTV link to the courtroom. The Calgary building, housing the various courts is hugely impressive and thoughtfully designed. I see there is an Aboriginal room designated so anything is possible.

Cherchri, I hope there is a "room for family only" and perhaps it will be utilized during the next preliminary hearing and then the trial. If the extended family didn't realize that this "room" accommodation was available it may have been a deterrent for them attending since it was only JO, RO and AL from the family who attended on the 14th. "

 

[Deleted member 117120]

Can you imagine.. a room filled with only families of both victims and accused, all together?

Would there not be designated rooms for both prosecuting and defense sides?

 

[sublimemumma]

Yes, the purpose of my comment irt DG being anxious possibly because he is innocent, was just to add a different perspective for those that may assume that he is anxious because he is guilty. Either way, imho, I think it is normal for one to be anxious in those circumstances and one can not read into that as being an indication of either guilt or innocence.

I think DG is really anxious to see what evidence they have against him because he still thinks he got away with it. He wants to see what they actually have. He is probably not saying much to LE until he knows what they have. I am praying that after he sees the huge amount of evidence, he realizes that he is NOT going to get away with it and finally admits to what he did with the bodies... I think until he sees the proof they have he still feels there is a chance of him getting away with it. (Especially without the bodies).

 

[sublimemumma]

Would there not be designated rooms for both prosecuting and defense sides?

I agree this would be the smart thing. It would be much easier on the families. In this case though I can't help but feel DG's parents are victims too... Though we don't know what kind of background he had, I feel for them. IMO

 

[otto]

Cherchri, I hope there is a "room for family only" and perhaps it will be utilized during the next preliminary hearing and then the trial. If the extended family didn't realize that this "room" accommodation was available it may have been a deterrent for them attending since it was only JO, RO and AL from the family who attended on the 14th. "

I would assume that the families of the victims and accused would want to be in the courtroom during trial. In the hearing of Aug 14, the accused was not in court, so it seems like an entirely different situation than a trial where the accused is present.

The preliminary hearing may be closed to the public (including extended family members). If not, then the evidence could be published well in advance of the trial, and that would compromise the rights of the accused.

 

[musicaljoke]

I had assumed that when he was arrested and put in jail for having false identity documents that those documents were confiscated. Perhaps the police put the false papers amongst his belongings when he was put in jail and returned them to him when he was released.

Heh! Wouldn't that be something, eh? Or maybe the bank sent him a new card. Or maybe he kept them under a flowerpot.