Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #16

[Cherchri]

The pervasive atmosphere here is that LE has not/ is not doing their job when there is no proof or hint of this. That the public is not being kept informed; we have no right to be kept informed. There shouldn't be any 'hints' or leaks. That LE is replete with bad characters who have tunnel vision.

As far as I can tell LE and the Crown are following Canadian Law giving due respect to the rights of the accused. IF they weren't, do you not think the defense attorney would be asking to have the case dismissed or at least ask for bail ? Remember, the alleged murderer was arrested . There had to have been some compelling evidence given, of which we are not party to, in order to have happened.
As we, the public, are not in danger, we do not have the right to be informed of evidence, witnesses, results of lab testing. Sure we are all curious, but WE DO NOT have to be informed.

In every profession in the world, there are good and bad members .. Until we hear in court, of LE's tunnel vision and rush to judgement, we should have some faith in the Canadian process of law.

Is there really a "pervasive atmosphere that Le has not/is not doing their job"????? I am surprised to hear that. For the most part, I believe most regular posters here have been thankful and respectful ito LE's efforts.

 

[Krystine]

Not addressing you personally at all. As another poster stated earlier, many people here seem to be operating on the premise that there's been some kind of LE screw-up/incompetence in this case. And yet, we have seen nothing to indicate that is indeed so.

If paranoia is too strong a word, how about pervasive mistrust?

And, no, there was not due diligence in the cases you mention that I am familiar with. Surely that is the whole point.

I try to read every post on here and have from the beginning. I don't have the impression that sleuthers think LE are on the wrong track,... if anything the community here seems to think CPS has got this and that they have done an exceptional job.

 

[Cherchri]

I try to read every post on here and have from the beginning. I don't have the impression that sleuthers think LE are on the wrong track,... if anything the community here seems to think CPS has got this and that they have done an exceptional job.

I don't either. I think the overwhelming majority of posters here have been very complimentary about LE's efforts. I would like to see some such remarks laid out along with this observation as I seem to have missed that completely.

 

[ABro]

I try to read every post on here and have from the beginning. I don't have the impression that sleuthers think LE are on the wrong track,... if anything the community here seems to think CPS has got this and that they have done an exceptional job.

I agree, perhaps I should clarify. There seem to be a sizeable minority who feel that the police have the wrong man.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I didn't know either, until I took a course last year. Love your posts lately, tho', my friend...

Me too Krystine, in regards to your Tinker comment and her posts! We all might not always agree with each other but I whether I agree or not, I love hearing how others think about things. Sometimes my opinions even change because of hearing why others think the way they do. It makes for an interesting world!

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Is there really a "pervasive atmosphere that Le has not/is not doing their job"????? I am surprised to hear that. For the most part, I believe most regular posters here have been thankful and respectful ito LE's efforts.

Yes, I hope people reading don't take our exploring all avenues as knocking LE, like you said, most of us hold them in high regard. There will always be 'what if' conversations here and tones can be misinterpreted on here (same as emails, text, etc.) it just happens.

I'm sure a lot of LE that did the searches on this case are fathers, must take a toll, it's one tough job, I sure couldn't do it.

 

[Krystine]

Me too Tinker! We all might not always agree with each other but I whether I agree or not, I love hearing how others think about things. Sometimes my opinions even change because of hearing why others think the way they do. It makes for an interesting world!

It's a great collection of minds on here...with everybody bringing their best. And sometimes their 'grossest'

 

[Tinkerbel1]

I agree, perhaps I should clarify. There seem to be a sizeable minority who feel that the police have the wrong man.

I believe the original question was...who thinks DG may have had an accomplice. At least that's the question I thought I was answering...then it went on to 'intuition:' and 'paranoia' from there...

And...if there is a large minority that believe LE may have the wrong man, then so be it. Its an opinion. No one is accusing LE of anything.

 

[Salem]

:modstop:


Please stop discussing what other posters think and/or feel. If they are thinking something, they will tell you and then you can respond respectfully. Also, stop the back and forth bickering, or timeouts will be issued. And please make a note, I will TO both sides. I will not ask who started it, what happened, etc. I will just issue TOs.

The bickering is not conducive to the conversation and only derails the thread.

Thanks,

Salem

 

[Hez]

I believe the original question was...who thinks DG may have had an accomplice. At least that's the question I thought I was answering...then it went on to 'intuition:' and 'paranoia' from there...

And...if there is a large minority that believe LE may have the wrong man, then so be it. Its an opinion. No one is accusing LE of anything.

BBM - No, not outright accusing them, but the tone is there, IMO.

 

[Hez]

The pervasive atmosphere here is that LE has not/ is not doing their job when there is no proof or hint of this. That the public is not being kept informed; we have no right to be kept informed. There shouldn't be any 'hints' or leaks. That LE is replete with bad characters who have tunnel vision.

As far as I can tell LE and the Crown are following Canadian Law giving due respect to the rights of the accused. IF they weren't, do you not think the defense attorney would be asking to have the case dismissed or at least ask for bail ? Remember, the alleged murderer was arrested . There had to have been some compelling evidence given, of which we are not party to, in order to have happened.
As we, the public, are not in danger, we do not have the right to be informed of evidence, witnesses, results of lab testing. Sure we are all curious, but WE DO NOT have to be informed.

In every profession in the world, there are good and bad members .. Until we hear in court, of LE's tunnel vision and rush to judgement, we should have some faith in the Canadian process of law.

:goodpost:

 

[deugirtni]

I think it is just silly to make accusations of some posters believing LE are not doing a good job, or even to make a point that some believe LE have the wrong man, just because some of us (perhaps two) feel differently for whatever reasons. Even after jurors sit through an entire trial and hear all of the (allowable) evidence in any given case, piece by piece, the jurors do not always reach the exact same conclusions. And I suppose that we would not even require trials at all, nor lawyers, if we could all take the given evidence and each reach the exact same conclusions, and with no evidence from the accused required.

In this case, as noted, there is a lack of information, which is perhaps how it should be, however the lack of information makes it easier still, to imagine the possibilities and that they could potentially be different than what we are pesented with on a platter. Isn't that what this site is for? Otherwise, it would be a fairly boring place over the next couple/few years regarding the cases in which LE has already made an arrest, while we sit tight and make no comments, or only comments in agreement with what is alluded to by LE, until we get to hear the evidence for ourselves.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Yes, and right from the outset of this case, I heard criminologists/ex-cops speculate there was probably more than one person involved in this crime. I would guess that's how the cops were leaning too. But then the evidence led them elsewhere, to a one-suspect crime. Likely, they shifted when the evidence didn't back up the initial theory of more than one suspect.



I have never dismissed intuition. It's a starting point. It leads you to evidence. It's not, however, a substitute for evidence, [modsnip]

Here's what I said yesterday:



http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...June-2014-*ARREST*-16&p=10983195#post10983195

Which then begs the question, how is it having tunnel vision for intuitively suggesting there may be an accomplice?

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I have no doubt that the Homicide Detectives have thoroughly explored the accomplice possibility. They have to in order to prevent 'reasonable doubt' from tanking the case. The Crown also goes through the case and explores alternate scenarios for the same reason.

Their confidence in the final determination that only one suspect was involved and they have the correct suspect, leads me to believe that *something* turned up evidence wise as confirmation.

When a child is involved in a brutal and high profile case, I highly doubt the Detectives were playing with evidence or any other nefarious behaviour. They take these cases VERY personally and most worked overtime without pay and gave up days off to work the case and follow evidence. They want these charges to be accurate and they don't want anything such as alternate theories to damage their case. JMO.

Currently, there is no reason to believe there is anyone else involved. Conversely, there is nothing to say conclusively that there was no one else involved. Laying charges is a matter of what you can prove, and it's quite plausible that LE simply doesn't have enough evidence to lay any charges an any other persons of interest, if there are any. Wouldn't everyone be surprised if someone was charged next week in connection to the case...

To absolutely dismiss one theory or another without anything truly conclusive is, in my opinion, the very definition of tunnel vision.

 

[news.talk]

Currently, there is no reason to believe there is anyone else involved. Conversely, there is nothing to say conclusively that there was no one else involved. Laying charges is a matter of what you can prove, and it's quite plausible that LE simply doesn't have enough evidence to lay any charges an any other persons of interest, if there are any. Wouldn't everyone be surprised if someone was charged next week in connection to the case...

To absolutely dismiss one theory or another without anything truly conclusive is, in my opinion, the very definition of tunnel vision.

I do agree. Although LE have stated emphatically that the suspect acted alone. Not having enough evidence to charge additional suspects is one thing, but to go on record that they are confident he acted acted alone is another.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

This could be a way for them to prepare to seal any holes the defense might try to punch through, and have answers for their reasonable doubt type questions also I'm thinking.

If they were hasty to go right to play offs, they might not think of a scenario the defence might use come trial time and be left surprised which might create reasonable doubt. Just my layman thoughts here too.

Also, since evidence is voluminous it could be a tangled web they want to lay out and present in a clear defined way to the courts. I'm wondering if this is part of the test driving, figuring out how to explain and use demonstrations for some complicated stuff the best way possible with no room for holes for the defence. JMO.

I completely agree, but it's a bit disconcerting that there isn't 100% confidence in the evidence that it's an airtight case. The need for a "test", "test drive", "test run", or however you want to describe it, hints that he thinks there *is* room for reasonable doubt.

 

[news.talk]

I think it is just silly to make accusations of some posters believing LE are not doing a good job, or even to make a point that some believe LE have the wrong man, just because some of us (perhaps two) feel differently for whatever reasons. Even after jurors sit through an entire trial and hear all of the (allowable) evidence in any given case, piece by piece, the jurors do not always reach the exact same conclusions. And I suppose that we would not even require trials at all, nor lawyers, if we could all take the given evidence and each reach the exact same conclusions, and with no evidence from the accused required.

In this case, as noted, there is a lack of information, which is perhaps how it should be, however the lack of information makes it easier still, to imagine the possibilities and that they could potentially be different than what we are pesented with on a platter. Isn't that what this site is for? Otherwise, it would be a fairly boring place over the next couple/few years regarding the cases in which LE has already made an arrest, while we sit tight and make no comments, or only comments in agreement with what is alluded to by LE, until we get to hear the evidence for ourselves.

Don't get me wrong - I do agree with much of your post...

I look at it this way - look at all the information we have sleuthed here and we have VERY limited information and none of the evidence to base our theories.

LE has without a doubt, found the same information we have, extended it to places we can't go, and they have the benefit of the evidence. This is why *I* am confident they did their due diligence and then some.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I do agree. Although LE have stated emphatically that the suspect acted alone. Not having enough evidence to charge additional suspects is one thing, but to go on record that they are confident he acted acted alone is another.

I know... and I am just arguing on the side of keeping discussion open. I don't have the quote in front of me, but one has to keep an open mind to the fact that *at the time* of the statement, there was perhaps one suspect. As the investigation continues, it's plausible that evidence can appear that alters that theory, and we may just not hear about it until charges are laid.

 

[news.talk]

I completely agree, but it's a bit disconcerting that there isn't 100% confidence in the evidence that it's an airtight case. The need for a "test", "test drive", "test run", or however you want to describe it, hints that he thinks there *is* room for reasonable doubt.

Personally, I think it is more of a matter of not having the bodies. While there is precedent, it is a steep uphill climb for the Crown. Much of the evidence from homicides come from the body. Without it, Defence can argue that the victim's are not even dead and the Crown will need to rely on some very technical and complex forensics to explain their case.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

BBM - No, not outright accusing them, but the tone is there, IMO.

Well I can't speak to what you're picking up, but it's certainly not my thought of LE. Not in the slightest. I think they're working with what they have. I'm not sure they have everything yet though.