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

[Cherchri]

I don't like the sound of that at all. "Test drive the evidence" and "make sure where we're at"..comes across as not very confident. This prosecutor is a newbie, I believe.
That and the kindly, sympathetic elderly judge who was described to us makes me squeamish about what could be the outcome here.

Who you calling' elderly girl the judge is not what I would describe as elderly but I guess that's a relative term . The prosecutor does not come across as assertive at all. That said, so far his time at the mike all told has been less than 10 minutes. KR does not strike me as aggressive so that may well make for an interesting joust.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

OK. Hypothetical. You are DG. You are in jail, charged with a triple homicide you didn't plan, didn't know was going to happen, you were just helping some buddies.
Your parents are in shock and grief that you their son are in jail for triple murder.
Your sister is in shock and grief because her 5 year old nephew and her in laws have been murdered, and because her own brother is in jail charged with the murders.
You know that the families are in shock and grief over their loss, and yearn for the recovery of the remains so they may be placed in a proper final resting place.

You face life in prison if convicted.

You would put "honor among thieves" ahead of all this?

If DG is in fact involved, on what basis does he bring a lawsuit against LE? They have correctly uncovered his involvement in a triple murder.

IMHO

Devil's Advocate here as I'm open minded to all this discussion, but maybe this is part of a plan if there is an accomplice.

They would've had a backup plan if either got caught to not talk and wait it out. We have to remember, it's only September, it hasn't been *that* long. He could be playing the waiting game as sort of a bluff, then when it comes to crunch time and there's no way out at all - maybe he'd give up the accomplice.

 

[Krystine]

Who you calling' elderly girl the judge is not what I would describe as elderly but I guess that's a relative term . The prosecutor does not come across as assertive at all. That said, so far his time at the mike all told has been less than 10 minutes. KR does not strike me as aggressive so that may well make for an interesting joust.

Sorry, Cherchri,...I think I'm relying on memory entirely too much these days. For some reason I thought 'silver haired, and kindly' were mentioned, and I went directly to Santa Claus

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Yes, I agree. DG was somewhat cooperative at one point so I would think if he was the assistant and not the master planner that he would answer a few questions early on. I am of the opinion that he is the mastermind I wonder if LE has other DNA mixed in any of the evidence.

I'm on the fence when discussing a secondary suspect, I see it could go two ways…

1. Either DG is the mastermind with the motive and enlisted the help of a trusted crony to assist in carrying it all out or,

2. DG's help was enlisted by someone else very close to AL/KL with motive who knows DG's criminal past/experience and DG's past issues with AL and used the bad blood reasoning to entice him

JMO

 

[Lalalacasbah]

OH...

I should rephrase, when I say someone VERY CLOSE to them - them, I mean AL/KL not LE. Not sure if my original quote came out right lol!

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I've thought 2 because of logistics, I think it would've take two to over power two people as I don't think they were asleep (sadly) IMO.

But I also like to feel I can trust LE when they tell us it was only him, the only reason I feel they wouldn't divulge knowledge of a second suspect to the public is because they would be surveilling the second suspect currently and that they wouldn't be a threat to the public. If there is a second suspect, they wouldn't be a threat to the public because I would think it's someone VERY CLOSE to them.

The opposite applies though too... two perp's would have an easier time subduing 2 older people, and probably wouldn't need to leave a lot of blood behind. They would also have an easy time of carrying victims away, and to perform any cleanup.

If the drag marks are also related to the crime, to me this seems more bungled and hasty, rather than well executed.

 

[Cherchri]

Sorry, Cherchri,...I think I'm relying on memory entirely too much these days. For some reason I thought 'silver haired, and kindly' were mentioned, and I went directly to Santa Claus

Ha ha ha ha K he is silvery haired although he doesn't have much hair. I guess him to be about 62? He does seem kind. Measured. Respectful. If you look at his background he has made some interesting judgements. Not sure if I can use his name but if you google DG trial anything dated after August initials TS, that is him. If you then just use his name on google you will find a lot of his decisions.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Yes, I agree. DG was somewhat cooperative at one point so I would think if he was the assistant and not the master planner that he would answer a few questions early on. I am of the opinion that he is the mastermind I wonder if LE has other DNA mixed in any of the evidence.

When I saw the press conference early on, I felt that "somewhat cooperative" quip from LE was made with a touch of sarcasm, meaning he's not giving them much intentionally.

 

[Sillybilly]

I don't like the sound of that at all. "Test drive the evidence" and "make sure where we're at"..comes across as not very confident. This prosecutor is a newbie, I believe.
That and the kindly, sympathetic elderly judge who was described to us makes me squeamish about what could be the outcome here.

IMO, a preliminary hearing IS a test drive of the strength of the case the Crown is presenting, so the Crown referring to it as such is appropriate. This is not like the Bosma case where the evidence seems to be so strong that the Crown can be uber-confident in going with direct indictment (no test drive there). Not every case is a slam dunk and especially one where bodies have not been recovered. At this point, the Crown is going forward with forensics combined with circumstantial, so it's not surprising the prelim will be a test drive

As for wanting to "see where we're at" ... the judge will weigh the strength of their case, and if they aren't "at" where they should be, the judge won't send the case on to trial (finit .. no "tweaking" is required or gets to be done to fine-tune after the fact) and the accused can be discharged.

ETA: Kindly, sympathetic and elderly does not equate to stupidity (I hope). As a nice person but also a learned judge, perhaps he won't appear such after he's heard all the evidence, LOL.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Devil's Advocate here as I'm open minded to all this discussion, but maybe this is part of a plan if there is an accomplice.

They would've had a backup plan if either got caught to not talk and wait it out. We have to remember, it's only September, it hasn't been *that* long. He could be playing the waiting game as sort of a bluff, then when it comes to crunch time and there's no way out at all - maybe he'd give up the accomplice.

Yes. Waiting to be given all the evidence is the smarter play, even if there is an accomplice. They may have nothing to connect an accomplice, and if they have little to connect the suspect... trial may be more tempting than confessing.

 

[Cherchri]

When I saw the press conference early on, I felt that "somewhat cooperative" quip from LE was made with a touch of sarcasm, meaning he's not giving them much intentionally.

I also read it that way.

 

[Cherchri]

IMO, a preliminary hearing IS a test drive of the strength of the case the Crown is presenting, so the Crown referring to it as such is appropriate. This is not like the Bosma case where the evidence seems to be so strong that the Crown can be uber-confident in going with direct indictment (no test drive there). Not every case is a slam dunk and especially one where bodies have not been recovered. At this point, the Crown is going forward with forensics combined with circumstantial, so it's not surprising the prelim will be a test drive

As for wanting to "see where we're at" ... the judge will weigh the strength of their case, and if they aren't "at" where they should be, the judge won't send the case on to trial (finit .. no "tweaking" is required or gets to be done to fine-tune after the fact) and the accused can be discharged.

ETA: Kindly, sympathetic and elderly does not equate to stupidity (I hope). As a nice person but also a learned judge, perhaps he won't appear such after he's heard all the evidence, LOL.

I agree 100%. I think the use of language though could have been ramped up a notch or two. So the essence is 100% but use of language too colloquial for my tastes in such an earnest matter. TS is a most learned judge and absolutely intellect will reign supreme. IMO.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I agree 100%. I think the use of language though could have been ramped up a notch or two. So the essence is 100% but use of language too colloquial for my tastes in such an earnest matter. TS is a most learned judge and absolutely intellect will reign supreme. IMO.

Are you saying this case now stays with this judge, right through the trial?

 

[LoisLane]

Calgary Herald has posted this article today. The reporter points out a couple dates. Will have to check and see if they should be reversed and if she made an error.

Alvin and Kathy Liknes and five-year-old Nathan O’Brien have not been seen since June 30.

The Eden Brook Memorial Gardens and Funeral website lists the couple’s date of death as June 29.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/c...nt+missing+with+five+year/10219140/story.html

The reporter has confirmed that this an error and it will be corrected.

The sentence should read that they were reported missing June 30.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

The opposite applies though too... two perp's would have an easier time subduing 2 older people, and probably wouldn't need to leave a lot of blood behind. They would also have an easy time of carrying victims away, and to perform any cleanup.

If the drag marks are also related to the crime, to me this seems more bungled and hasty, rather than well executed.

Very true, so hard to decipher all this!

I still can't get over the fact he brought his own truck to a planned crime scene.

All of us keep saying 'if it wasn't for the CCTV' but I also have to think if this was so planned the suspect didn't think of a CCTV, but he must've thought about the 'old fashioned cameras' - that being human eyes/witnesses in the neighborhood.

Houses are so close, people go for walks, people walk their dogs, people can just be getting home from a shift, he must've know he could've been seen by human eyes at some point, why bring the truck? He must've parked it elsewhere until he had to use the back pick up to take the victims.

 

[Cherchri]

Are you saying this case now stays with this judge, right through the trial?

I know the Dec 4 and May 19 appearances are before him. I don't know if it goes to trial that we would be assured of the same judge but I can't imagine any reason for the case to be assigned to someone else at that point.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

The reporter has confirmed that this an error and it will be corrected.

The sentence should read that they were reported missing June 30.

Thanks for the scoop LL! Great that you looked into it.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Yes, definetly!

ETA... But why would DG be willing to sit in jail for it? Couldn't he have presented compelling testimony to LE that would have given them reasonable doubt?

LE aren't the ones he has to show reasonable doubt to. I would imagine that if there were other people (singular or plural) that the "honor amongst thieves" applies...I don't think DG is a snitch. Are you kidding? If he ratted anyone out, he's dead. He'll figure this out another way, and it'll be through KR and the defense team...or...he may have given some hints to LE that may have them looking in the appropriate direction...or...he's going to sit there for a while and then snitch, just so it looks like he didn't.
Could be lots of reasons...but it's going to come out eventually. JMO

 

[Tinkerbel1]

<rsbm>

From another source ... MSM reported that Allen saw DG at Thanksgiving and that they didn't speak much.

check swedie's earlier post with video link:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...algary-30-June-2014-5&p=10721326#post10721326

Not considered gossip when it comes from family, LE or MSM

Whatever it's considered...gossip, opinion, etc. What's the relevance? I've gone to family events and haven't spoken one-on-one with someone...it means nothing. I'm not a loner and I'm not up to anything bad. Sometimes, a person just doesn't feel like being social...maybe there's a lot on their mind, whatever, it means nothing.

 

[deugirtni]

http://m.torontosun.com/2014/09/17/preliminary-trial-set-in-calgary-trial-of-man-accused-of-murdering-young-nathan-obrien-and-his-grandparents-alvin-and-kathy-liknes

Parker said although a direct indictment could have been drafted, depriving Garland of a preliminary inquiry and taking the case straight to trial, he said it wasn’t advisable.

“In a case like this I was against a direct indictment,” he following the brief appearance by Garland, who did not address the court.

“It gives us a change to test drive some of the evidence,” he said, of calling some of the Crown’s case prior to trial.

He said he won’t be thinking trial strategy until he gets a committal against Garland, who faces two charges of first-degree murder and a third of second-degree murder.

“As I’ve often said to witnesses, this is the regular season and you don’t get to the playoffs until you get through the regular season,” Parker said.

“And you’ve got to get past the preliminary inquiry before you start talking trial.”

....

Parker said despite charges the investigation is ongoing.

“The investigation is continuing as it should,” he said.