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

[Tinkerbel1]

Now that we've decided that Calgary oil executives are sneaking out of the 37th floor of the oil company building to do drug deals in the back alley, what next?
Aliens riding meteors?

Lol...everyone knows aliens have spaceships nowadays...its the 21st century!

 

[Slebby]

Or as LE puts it..."leaving no stone unturned". Question...do you feel that the Defense will not be looking down every single avenue ... Including this one? KR definitely will be, IMO.

With all due respect, I don't think KR will be "looking down every single avenue" because he'd get nowhere fast with that strategy. He will look down every avenue that has the chance of casting reasonable doubt on the prosecution case. Key word "reasonable". It's one thing to ponder different possibilities on Websleuths. It's completely different in court. KR can't throw any old alternative theory about organized crime, drug rings, money laundering etc. without some sort of factual basis or connection to the victims. What is the link? Why bring it up? A judge would shut him down in no time if he presented a case that shows how *some* people in *some* industries including oil and gas *sometimes* get involved in drugs (money laundering etc.) and the Ls and OBs *may* have known or worked or unknowingly invested in the same businesses as those folks. IMO.

LE follow the evidence and the facts. So, IMO, some stones do remain unturned, at least until something points LE in a particular direction.

IMO

 

[ABro]

Or as LE puts it..."leaving no stone unturned". Question...do you feel that the Defense will not be looking down every single avenue ... Including this one? KR definitely will be, IMO.

If the defense has good reason to look down that avenue, they'll look there. If they don't, they won't waste their time.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

With all due respect, I don't think KR will be "looking down every single avenue" because he'd get nowhere fast with that strategy. He will look down every avenue that has the chance of casting reasonable doubt on the prosecution case. Key word "reasonable". It's one thing to ponder different possibilities on Websleuths. It's completely different in court. KR can't throw any old alternative theory about organized crime, drug rings, money laundering etc. without some sort of factual basis or connection to the victims. What is the link? Why bring it up? A judge would shut him down in no time if he presented a case that shows how *some* people in *some* industries including oil and gas *sometimes* get involved in drugs (money laundering etc.) and the Ls and OBs *may* have known or worked or unknowingly invested in the same businesses as those folks. IMO.

LE follow the evidence and the facts. So, IMO, some stones do remain unturned, at least until something points LE in a particular direction.

IMO

Ok...having said that, you don't, or won't in any way consider the possibility of KR "looking down every single avenue" to find a connection of unsavoury types of people having an "indirect or direct" connection with any of AL's businesses as a mean of casting reasonable doubt that DG is the only possible guilty party here? You honestly don't believe that the Defense is going to dig deep and hard to find other players in the Liknes' lives that could have potentially caused them harm? So, are you saying there is only one person in this entire world that could be and is responsible for the Liknes' demise? I'm not talking "general" or "casual" "sometimes get involved in drugs, money laundering, etc. I'm talking bigger than that. Perhaps the Defense will uncover a connection with one of AL's investors (maybe AL was even unaware of the investors 'business' dealings as I doubt he'ld list that on his resume or portfolio).

Essentially, you're saying that KR is not going to leave "no stone unturned" in his hunt of plausible alternatives to actually do a good job for his client DG and cast reasonable doubt? Is KR from Legal Aid ?(not that they aren't viable legal respresentation, but some may not have as much experience as KR).

 

[Tinkerbel1]

This is terribly unkind and added nothing to the discussion. IMO

Unfortunately, we still live in a society that more often than not reacts with "an eye for an eye" mentality...IMO, this comment was spurred by unkindness/derision:slap: initiated towards OOTD. Probably we should all try to be a little kinder in our manner of speech on here. Sometimes the digs and 'gang-up's get emotions running a little high. We're supposed to be on the same team having a reasonable discussion. It seems to me that there are some that get downright mean and/or bullheaded when their views are not completely accepted/supported.

Not saying this comment was right, just saying that sometimes people get pushed a bit by some of the more emotional and aggressive posters. IMO

 

[Sillybilly]

KR can't throw any old alternative theory about organized crime, drug rings, money laundering etc. without some sort of factual basis or connection to the victims.

<rsbm>

Actually the defence doesn't have to prove what they say (only the prosecution has the burden of proof). They can throw out all sorts of theories, and if one of those theories creates reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors, the DT is doing their job.

 

[Sillybilly]

Personal sniping gets threads closed down :furious:

 

[Tinkerbel1]

With all due respect, I don't think KR will be "looking down every single avenue" because he'd get nowhere fast with that strategy. He will look down every avenue that has the chance of casting reasonable doubt on the prosecution case. Key word "reasonable". It's one thing to ponder different possibilities on Websleuths. It's completely different in court. KR can't throw any old alternative theory about organized crime, drug rings, money laundering etc. without some sort of factual basis or connection to the victims. What is the link? Why bring it up? A judge would shut him down in no time if he presented a case that shows how *some* people in *some* industries including oil and gas *sometimes* get involved in drugs (money laundering etc.) and the Ls and OBs *may* have known or worked or unknowingly invested in the same businesses as those folks. IMO.

LE follow the evidence and the facts. So, IMO, some stones do remain unturned, at least until something points LE in a particular direction.

IMO

Just a general question...why is there so much 'push-back' over the whole "unsavoury character" posts? I don't understand? There is a triple murder to solve...if DG is an 'unsavoury', and AL did business with him back in the day...then why can't that have continued to present day? Business people don't care where their investors/clients money comes from...they just sell their product and services. Ha! I owned a simple beauty salon...do you know how many of those are fronts for drugs/prostitution/money laundering, etc.? It's everywhere....could name you several out here in Edmonton...was that what I did? No. But it's being done...anyone who starts a business has the goal to succeed...a lot don't care how that happens. I didn't care if someone came to my shop and paid for their services with drug money...I didn't do the crime, so what difference does it make to me where they got their money. None. None at all.

 

[Sillybilly]

Just a general question...why is there so much 'push-back' over the whole "unsavoury character" posts? I don't understand? There is a triple murder to solve...if DG is an 'unsavoury', and AL did business with him back in the day...then why can't that have continued to present day? Business people don't care where their investors/clients money comes from...they just sell their product and services. Ha! I owned a simple beauty salon...do you know how many of those are fronts for drugs/prostitution/money laundering, etc.? It's everywhere....could name you several out here in Edmonton...was that what I did? No. But it's being done...anyone who starts a business has the goal to succeed...a lot don't care how that happens. I didn't care if someone came to my shop and paid for their services with drug money...I didn't do the crime, so what difference does it make to me where they got their money. None. None at all.

Personal experience .. an upstanding relative of mine had a business in Vancouver. Business would have made a great money-laundering opportunity to those so inclined, but relative declined a sale to unsavouries. HAD something happened down the road to my upstanding rellie, there still could have been a consideration to whether there was an association to unsavoury peeps.

 

[Sillybilly]

Aliens riding meteors?

<rsbm>

Now where'd our spaceship emoticon disappear to? It was here for a reason :alien: :beamup:

:biggrin:

 

[Slebby]

Ok...having said that, you don't, or won't in any way consider the possibility of KR "looking down every single avenue" to find a connection of unsavoury types of people having an "indirect or direct" connection with any of AL's businesses as a mean of casting reasonable doubt that DG is the only possible guilty party here? You honestly don't believe that the Defense is going to dig deep and hard to find other players in the Liknes' lives that could have potentially caused them harm? So, are you saying there is only one person in this entire world that could be and is responsible for the Liknes' demise? I'm not talking "general" or "casual" "sometimes get involved in drugs, money laundering, etc. I'm talking bigger than that. Perhaps the Defense will uncover a connection with one of AL's investors (maybe AL was even unaware of the investors 'business' dealings as I doubt he'ld list that on his resume or portfolio).

Essentially, you're saying that KR is not going to leave "no stone unturned" in his hunt of plausible alternatives to actually do a good job for his client DG and cast reasonable doubt? Is KR from Legal Aid ?(not that they aren't viable legal respresentation, but some may not have as much experience as KR).

Maybe we need to define what is meant by "every single avenue".
(I doubt KR will go down the road of prostitution, cattle rustling, satanic worshippers, cannibals, ....)

I am sure KR will launch a vigorous defence. I'm sure he has an investigator who will look into other avenues - possible enemies, disgruntled investors, ex-spouses, other crimes in the Parkhill neighbourhood, estate sale related crimes, and so on. These are the kinds of "stones" I believe KR will not leave "unturned". What i don't think the investigator will do is start with a very general theory, such has been discussed here over these many posts, that there is a lot of unsavoury characters in the O and G industry and somehow that could have led to the murders. Remember, that is the "stone" we've been talking about. So based on what has been discussed so far, no, I think KR would find that "unsavoury characters in O and G" a non-starter. Especially if, as y'all are insisting, you aren't connecting any dots to the victims with that line of thinking.

If you recall from these discussions, some of us, including a moderator, felt the discussion of unsavoury characters, drug rings etc. was casting the victims in a negative light. it would be helpful to me if you could illustrate a scenario where the drug activity of an employee or co-worker in a Liknes or O'Brien job or investment could connect to the murders. For example, i don't think it is enough to unearth the fact that "Barry in accounting was arrested in 2010 for having a meth lab in his garage". i believe it would need to lead to "Barry in Accounting was arrested in 2010 for having a meth lab in his garage and therefore he had to kill the Ls because___" Do you see what I'm saying?

When you say you're not talking "general" or "casual", but something big with one of AL's investors, imo, KR would still need to connect the dots to how it pertains to the Ls being murdered. If one of his investors also laundered money through his dry-cleaning business, how does that person's criminality lead to a conclusion that the Ls must die? i don't believe KR can just toss out facts about other folks in the periphery of the L's life and expect that to constitute reasonable doubt.

i hope this helps.

eace:

 

[Slebby]

Personal experience .. an upstanding relative of mine had a business in Vancouver. Business would have made a great money-laundering opportunity to those so inclined, but relative declined a sale to unsavouries. HAD something happened down the road to my upstanding rellie, there still could have been a consideration to whether there was an association to unsavoury peeps.

Yes, exactly! This is the kind of example where you can connect the dots - there is a motive.

What has not been made clear to me is how the "proximity to unsavoury characters" leads to "the Ls must die", what is the motive?

imho

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Wow, good memory. That's right, forgot about that. What did happen I wonder??

Lol...love the pic! :cheer:

 

[Lalalacasbah]

We have Sam Elliots galore here in the capital. With grey ponytails smoking medical mj. Makes me really miss the men of Alberta

But do they have his voice? Lol

ETA-just noticed Tinkerbel1 made same comment! I must slow down and read through before commenting! Good to know so many women swoon over a voice!!

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Yes, exactly! This is the kind of example where you can connect the dots - there is a motive.

What has not been made clear to me is how the "proximity to unsavoury characters" leads to "the Ls must die", what is the motive?

imho

Well, we wouldn't know the potential motive until we knew who the "unsavoury character" was. That's why I'm hoping that LE are looking at all angles of this case, including those of the victims' business associates (knowing or unknowing), there may be other people out there with motive besides DG. It would very likely revolve around loss of money or some such commodity.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

But do they have his voice? Lol

ETA-just noticed Tinkerbel1 made same comment! I must slow down and read through before commenting! Good to know so many women swoon over a voice!!

Lol....I think maybe even some men swoon over that voice. I know I've heard some guys try emulate it when the Dodge Ram Tough commercial comes on...lol. Funny. :fainted:

 

[Slebby]

Well, we wouldn't know the potential motive until we knew who the "unsavoury character" was.

Yes, exactly! But that involves beginning with the specific, not the general. Beginning with a specific case like "Barry in Accounting was angry at AL because he fired him for cooking meth in the staff lounge", versus "some people involved in the O and G industry have been known to be involved in drugs, money laundering etc. and maybe someone somewhere in the O and G world is the perp". Make sense?

imho

 

[LoisLane]

Please excuse my ignorance, oversight or lack of memory...but that sweatshirt that DG was wearing when he was being taken in to get processed had the logo Paramount Resources on it. Has anyone checked into possible involvement with them? Wonder where or how he got that sweatshirt? Not that it matters, but it might.

I think it was discussed as a Calgary Corporate Challenge event shirt. Some ideas I recall include:
- DG may have been issued the clothing during processing at police headquarters (although I did see a man in a disposable white jumpsuit more recently, after the arrest of DG and the perp walk fiasco)
-DG could have also been buying second-hand clothing
- DG could have been a participant in CCC
- DG could have been employed with Paramount Resources
- DG could have won it at a golf tourney (that would be an odd giveaway, a shirt from a past event)

Having worked in the t-shirt industry for corporate marketing apparel as a wholesaler and as a client and have seen orders for CCC I can comment that while extra tees would be ordered for such an event, the numbers would be representative to the number of people participating. Of course extras tees can be on hand but they aren't typically a marketing item you just hand out to spectators, especially one catered to a specific event. If it was only the logo of Paramount without reference to CCC it may not be so unusual. If the shirt had always belonged to DG and he willinginly wore it I would be very interested what his appeal to the shirt and company is.

 

[LoriMcA]

<rsbm>

Now where'd our spaceship emoticon disappear to? It was here for a reason :alien: :beamup:

:biggrin:

Totally off topic but once it was mentioned I had to go looking....these are adorable!


:ufo: :abduction: :alien3: haha....

PS- Sam Elliott discussion....as much as I LOVE Sam in Roadhouse.....my fave would be his role in Mask......oh lordy.... :hot::crush:

Okay...enough of my being silly....back to googling seriously!

 

[LoisLane]

Yes, exactly! But that involves beginning with the specific, not the general. Beginning with a specific case like "Barry in Accounting was angry at AL because he fired him for cooking meth in the staff lounge", versus "some people involved in the O and G industry have been known to be involved in drugs, money laundering etc. and maybe someone somewhere in the O and G world is the perp". Make sense?

imho

But what about that DG was arrested and charged for possession of meth and various other charges in BC that would most likely be in relation to the drug trade? If the LE and prosecution pursued this they may have found more evidence hidden between the lines of his alleged underground life and his ability to commit murder. That is how I see the relation.