Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #15

[deugirtni]

I'm not arguing about how much detail there must be in their 'evidence', or that it would take a long time to gather it all up into a neat package, or that the speed of transmission has anything to do with innocence or guilt, or that the date of presentation has a bearing on the outcome.. it's really pretty simple.. I expected to hear confirmation from at least one news reporter taking up one small line in a newspaper somewhere, that the disclosure that LE and the prosecution have been saying will be given to the accused's counsel by a certain date, has in fact been accomplished. And therefore, if so, hopefully, as expected, KR will have had the time and opportunity to review it with the accused, prior to his court date next week.
I'm sure it will be reported on then, and I guess I will have to wait for that.
Perhaps the likes of reporters who are more interested in badgering the accused publicly about where he hid the bodies are not open-minded enough to be in a position to care or consider that perhaps the accused may in fact be innocent and may be feeling really interested and 'anxious' to see what got him there.
I also wonder when I hear of a case where a convict has spent years of his life in prison only to be later found innocent, if the reporters who wrote their news articles with the bias of helping that accused be perceived by the readers as guilty, have any feeling of regret, guilt, embarrassment, etc. Or by then, perhaps too much time would have passed to even care or remember.

Innocence or guilt has nothing to do with the speed of the court process. It is slow, and scheduled no matter how much one dislikes it.

Had they received the disclosure at day 22 of the 30, it would not have made a lick of difference. The court appearance would have been the same date, and the defence most likely would have asked for time to review the evidence, and received the exact same date to appear again that they currently have.

In an ideal world, the truth always wins and the truth is always told, so issues like murder can be dealt with almost immediately. Currently, that is not the case, so once you have been formally charged, the process takes as long as it takes.

 

[deugirtni]

Is there anything that *you* are curious about? Or do you already have *all* of the answers? I am obviously not going to do what you have suggested, however, if I was a news reporter in Calgary, I would certainly be doing that. As stated numerous times, it has been said over and over again that the disclosure is coming, I only wanted to know if it had in fact occurred. I'm not sure why it is difficult for some to accept that some are curious about some things, and others are curious about other things, and for different reasons and from different perspectives. We don't all have to agree. To some it may seem like a petty, trivial thing for the accused to get to see the evidence that got him thrown in jail. To me, it is not. It may be procedural in that it is a requirement, but it is a lot more than that to the accused, IMHO of course.

For those curious as to whether any disclosure has been provided to the defence, please Google their contact information, call them directly, let them know who you are and why you want to know...

MSM also doesn't report on when the lawyers consult case histories, call court clerks to confirm details, purchase office supplies for the case and a whole host of other routine tasks associated with the case... because it's all just procedural.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Just driving around the neighborhood of 123-38A Avenue SW (courtesy of Google) and I would not be surprised if other homeowners in the area offered up video footage. That is a pretty swanky neighborhood, no expense spared style, and some would most likely include security surveillance.

I am too haha! On Google too of course. To add to your comment, I also can't believe how close the houses are, they're beyond close, practically touching. I mean, the one that was empty even has a window on it's right side facing the sidewalk where the marks were found. I mean, how brazen if the suspect didn't know it was empty! Someone could look out there basement window and see someone dragging deceased victims by them.

 

[LoisLane]

I am too haha! On Google too of course. To add to your comment, I also can't believe how close the houses are, they're beyond close, practically touching. I mean, the one that was empty even has a window on it's right side facing the sidewalk where the marks were found. I mean, how brazen if the suspect didn't know it was empty! Someone could look out there basement window and see someone dragging deceased victims by them.

Did you see me? I was driving all over the curbs... ha ha!

The houses are very close. Infills are crazy these days. These particular homes are air tight and I bet they only host 2 people at a time. I doubt they ever hear what is going on outside, I also think the houses are pretty dark at night.

At 5:00 this morning I heard a house alarm going off in our neighborhood, it was going on for about 10 minutes. I was so dead tired I didn't even bother to get out of bed. I felt pretty bad about that, but I had heard the alarm go off another night and so I justified it to being a glitch or the homeowner tripped it.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Did you see me? I was driving all over the curbs... ha ha!

The houses are very close. Infills are crazy these days. These particular homes are air tight and I bet they only host 2 people at a time. I doubt they ever hear what is going on outside, I also think the houses are pretty dark at night.

At 5:00 this morning I heard a house alarm going off in our neighborhood, it was going on for about 10 minutes. I was so dead tired I didn't even bother to get out of bed. I felt pretty bad about that, but I had heard the alarm go off another night and so I justified it to being a glitch or the homeowner tripped it.

You almost ran me over, I was walking on the curb! :laughing:

True, I bet the houses are airtight and dark, still pretty brazen if you ask me. The Liknes house is in full view of the house across the street, it still floors me I guess of the nerve, but again, late at night, people are asleep…

I'm so bad, if I hear anything concerning or suspicious around the neighborhood I always make sure to open my eyes and check the time of when I heard anything, but….I don't usually get up either. Actually, I witnessed an assault in the neighborhood a couple months ago, had to provide a statement to police, doubt I'd have to testify, but the Crown might be calling with more questions, we'll see. The sad thing was, I had my cell phone, took a photo of one of the perps, but duh….should've taken video of the whole thing going down! It's funny how you don't think in the heat of events.

 

[stan laurel]

Did you see me? I was driving all over the curbs... ha ha!

The houses are very close. Infills are crazy these days. These particular homes are air tight and I bet they only host 2 people at a time. I doubt they ever hear what is going on outside, I also think the houses are pretty dark at night.

At 5:00 this morning I heard a house alarm going off in our neighborhood, it was going on for about 10 minutes. I was so dead tired I didn't even bother to get out of bed. I felt pretty bad about that, but I had heard the alarm go off another night and so I justified it to being a glitch or the homeowner tripped it.

I saw a guy who looked like a worried butler in a hurry - no lie - I even thought maybe he did something. Some people - though - are so absorbed in their worlds in their homes on their puters that they almost have selective hearing. My sister won't notice you unless you tap on her shoulder when she's on her Mac, the kettle will whistle endlessly and it wont get in her ear drums in the slightest. A friend plays online point and shoot games on his TV with a huge frigging surround sound system blaring, so if you were shot outside his house he would just think it's ambient noise from his game.

 

[stan laurel]

Maybe BD was a crime victim or maybe she's tagging BD to read the crimes stories. The commenter ONLY commented on DG's photo, not on NOs, kinda weird…..Probably nothing, but a sad face for DG is kinda weird….

It's sad all around and I'm guessing some people knew DG and his background but still couldn't see a darker side of him and/or refuse to acknowledge that.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

It's sad all around and I'm guessing some people knew DG and his background but still couldn't see a darker side of him and/or refuse to acknowledge that.

I ended up deleted my paragraph, turned out it was nothing after snooping more. There I go, jumping the gun, always looking for a mystery to solve when there wasn't one to begin with. Looks like they were just people following the story intently like we are. And yeah, the whole thing sure is sad.

 

[LoisLane]

I saw a guy who looked like a worried butler in a hurry - no lie - I even thought maybe he did something. Some people - though - are so absorbed in their worlds in their homes on their putters that they almost have selective hearing. My sister won't notice you unless you tap on her shoulder when she's on her Mac, the kettle will whistle endlessly and it wont get in her ear drums in the slightest. A friend plays online point and shoot games on his TV with a huge frigging surround sound system blaring, so if you were shot outside his house he would just think it's ambient noise from his game.

Yup! The only way I hear anything going on outside is if the windows are open. I always sleep with my window open, I feel safer that way. The skylight is the best because I can hear the people across the street and cars driving by. My two yappy dogs are my true alarm source.

 

[stan laurel]

double post

 

[stan laurel]

I ended up deleted my paragraph, turned out it was nothing after snooping more. There I go, jumping the gun, always looking for a mystery to solve when there wasn't one to begin with. Looks like they were just people following the story intently like we are. And yeah, the whole thing sure is sad.

snooping is good that's why we are on websnoops.

I noticed that you edited this post too "corrected grammar",, let me guess, she needed reprimand after leaving her dentures in the dishwasher again.

 

[LoisLane]

I hope LE does another sweep of the Airdrie property now that it has snowed and takes a look at the story the land tells.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I'm not arguing about how much detail there must be in their 'evidence', or that it would take a long time to gather it all up into a neat package, or that the speed of transmission has anything to do with innocence or guilt, or that the date of presentation has a bearing on the outcome.. it's really pretty simple.. I expected to hear confirmation from at least one news reporter taking up one small line in a newspaper somewhere, that the disclosure that LE and the prosecution have been saying will be given to the accused's counsel by a certain date, has in fact been accomplished. And therefore, if so, hopefully, as expected, KR will have had the time and opportunity to review it with the accused, prior to his court date next week.
I'm sure it will be reported on then, and I guess I will have to wait for that.
Perhaps the likes of reporters who are more interested in badgering the accused publicly about where he hid the bodies are not open-minded enough to be in a position to care or consider that perhaps the accused may in fact be innocent and may be feeling really interested and 'anxious' to see what got him there.
I also wonder when I hear of a case where a convict has spent years of his life in prison only to be later found innocent, if the reporters who wrote their news articles with the bias of helping that accused be perceived by the readers as guilty, have any feeling of regret, guilt, embarrassment, etc. Or by then, perhaps too much time would have passed to even care or remember.

MSM doesn't ask about the most basic of basic mandatory procedures in all types of trials, be it in family court, civil court, criminal court et al... because one can assume it has been turned over.

For those having trouble keeping up, here's a brief outline of the discussion so far...

It's odd that we haven't heard if it was turned over.

... no it's not odd. Here are some good reasons why.

Well, they said they would have it by a certain time. It's odd.

Yes they said that, but there is nothing sinister about it, and here are more compelling reasons why.

Well, we should have heard something.

Not necessarily, and here are the reasons why.

Well, it would be nice to know.

Just assume it happened. Here is why they don't report on it.

Well, we need to know, and because we don't know, and a tactless journalist asked a rather inappropriate question, society just doesn't care.

Okay... fill your boots.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Is there anything that *you* are curioust? Or do you already have *all* of the answers? I am obviously not going to do what you have suggested, however, if I was a news reporter in Calgary, I would certainly be doing that. As stated numerous times, it has been said over and over again that the disclosure is coming, I only wanted to know if it had in fact occurred. I'm not sure why it is difficult for some to accept that some are curious about some things, and others are curious about other things, and for different reasons and from different perspectives. We don't all have to agree. To some it may seem like a petty, trivial thing for the accused to get to see the evidence that got him thrown in jail. To me, it is not. It may be procedural in that it is a requirement, but it is a lot more than that to the accused, IMHO of course.

Again... the point of the exercise was to demonstrate how far you would get, just like most journalists, if you just decided to call up KR and ask that question. There are many, many good reasons why it is not being reported... the primary reason being that it is a virtually worthless piece of information to the public at large.

No one is saying that you shouldn't be curious. No one has said that the evidence isn't important to DG. No one is saying journalists should be allowed to ask inappropriate questions on a perp walk. For reasons unknown, those are all issues being read into probably the most mundane, over detailed, and common sensical information I have read in my time here.

Again... take the default position... "They are not trying to offend me". Respond to points with counterpoint.

It was stated very early on, we don't know if it occurred for sure, and we will know more on the 17th. That is as good as it gets. It's not odd. It's not going to change. It's not worth investing anymore time in trying to educate those who ask for more information, or for reasons why, only to dismiss the effort.

 

[Sillybilly]

:deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:

 

[otto]

Don't you think it's the media that makes the circus? I mean, if the tree falls in the forest and no one's around does anybody hear or did it actually fall? lol, you know what I mean...

Lots of people charged might walk that same route in cuffs with LE, but no press around to make a spectacle is all I mean, we only saw the perp walk from the news coverage - no news, no perp walk to see. Playing devil's advocate here.

Everyone that is arrested is processed in the same way. The problem here was that the media was completely disrespectful. That's probably the first time that a reporter was shoving a camera in the face of someone that was handcuffed. Photos are usually taken from a distance, and reporters don't usually try to have a conversation with someone in that position. The only response from Chief Hanson was that they need a new building to prevent it from happening again ... so that's now on the agenda.

 

[otto]

Is there anything that *you* are curious about? Or do you already have *all* of the answers? I am obviously not going to do what you have suggested, however, if I was a news reporter in Calgary, I would certainly be doing that. As stated numerous times, it has been said over and over again that the disclosure is coming, I only wanted to know if it had in fact occurred. I'm not sure why it is difficult for some to accept that some are curious about some things, and others are curious about other things, and for different reasons and from different perspectives. We don't all have to agree. To some it may seem like a petty, trivial thing for the accused to get to see the evidence that got him thrown in jail. To me, it is not. It may be procedural in that it is a requirement, but it is a lot more than that to the accused, IMHO of course.

If the prosecution is required to deliver discovery related to the arrest to the defence after 30 days, and the prosecutor stated that it will be delivered after 30 days (Aug 15 is 30 days), why would anyone question whether that happened? Are we suspicious of the prosecutor and whether he is capable of doing his job and keeping his word? If so, why? If not, what is the problem?

 

[Slebby]

Mr. Slebby (lawyer) would take a dim view of a reporter calling about disclosure and would have "no comment".

FWIW, y'all can ask any lawyer buddies you know if they'd respond differently.

 

[otto]

Again... the point of the exercise was to demonstrate how far you would get, just like most journalists, if you just decided to call up KR and ask that question. There are many, many good reasons why it is not being reported... the primary reason being that it is a virtually worthless piece of information to the public at large.

No one is saying that you shouldn't be curious. No one has said that the evidence isn't important to DG. No one is saying journalists should be allowed to ask inappropriate questions on a perp walk. For reasons unknown, those are all issues being read into probably the most mundane, over detailed, and common sensical information I have read in my time here.

Again... take the default position... "They are not trying to offend me". Respond to points with counterpoint.

It was stated very early on, we don't know if it occurred for sure, and we will know more on the 17th. That is as good as it gets. It's not odd. It's not going to change. It's not worth investing anymore time in trying to educate those who ask for more information, or for reasons why, only to dismiss the effort.

I can report that the defence has received discovery related to the arrest. I can report that additional documents are still trickling in. I can also report that, at the next scheduled hearing, the defence will most likely request additional time to review the documents. I can report that the judge will grant that extension. How do I know this? I know this because it is the prosecutor's job to provide those documents, it is the defence lawyer's tactic to delay the proceedings at this stage of the game, and it is the judge's position to give the benefit of the doubt to the accused. It's that simple.

 

[Slebby]

I hope LE does another sweep of the Airdrie property now that it has snowed and takes a look at the story the land tells.

What do you think they can find after a snowfall that they didn't find in the initial sweep of the property? I thought they were quite thorough back in July - grid search, canine units. I would think the snow, though temporary, is only going to help eradicate any last traces of evidence.