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

[Tinkerbel1]

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.

Really? Shane Parker is a newbie? I wouldn't think they would assign someone inexperienced to a case of this magnitude. Huh. Interesting. Thanks for the info. As far as the elderly, nice judge goes...don't judge a book by its cover. I've said before, those with true power don't have to stomp their fists and raise their voices...they can get whatever they want accomplished quietly, nicely and with a very friendly smile on their face. A lot of the time these types are tougher because their power is borne of confidence and strength. I'ld be willing to bet that this judge is one smart cookie. I just want to say, I've heard a few times that the judge is 'elderly'...62ish isn't elderly for a judge really. IMO

 

[Tinkerbel1]

I have a feeling that the "test drive" comment was more for explaining the preliminary hearing to the lay person - An attempt to help explain what it entails and why they do it.

Out of curiosity, is a "show cause" hearing in the states the same thing as our preliminary hearings? I am not versed on U.S. courts but I hear that term a lot.

Even to the layman (which I am) ... "test drive the evidence" sounds like 'well let's see if what we've got sticks...if not, we'll find something else. It sounds like they're buying a car to see if they like it. Where's the "punch" behind that? Wow! If I were the accused, and I heard the Prosecution saying they were gonna "test drive the evidence"...I'ld be pretty po'd!! What is that? Either you have it or you don't...you don't test drive it to see if it works! Really dumb thing to say, and I'm sure it was said in error. Hopefully he doesn't make too many of those kinds of statements in court....doesn't do much for his credibility. Might just talk himself into an acquittal. IMO

 

[Cherchri]

They could also be witnesses speaking to pre-meditation such as buying chemicals. They could also be witnesses to after the crime such as dump sites or car washes.

Great thank you Im adding those possibilities to my list.

 

[Cherchri]

Really? Shane Parker is a newbie? I wouldn't think they would assign someone inexperienced to a case of this magnitude. Huh. Interesting. Thanks for the info. As far as the elderly, nice judge goes...don't judge a book by its cover. I've said before, those with true power don't have to stomp their fists and raise their voices...they can get whatever they want accomplished quietly, nicely and with a very friendly smile on their face. A lot of the time these types are tougher because their power is borne of confidence and strength. I'ld be willing to bet that this judge is one smart cookie. I just want to say, I've heard a few times that the judge is 'elderly'...62ish isn't elderly for a judge really. IMO

Mandatory retirement for a judge in Canada is 75 so agreed he has plenty more time on the bench. I may be wrong about 62 that's a guess. I did some research today and have not found a single case on his docket where anyone was found innocent. By the same token, he doesn't seem to mete out vey heavy sentences.

 

[Slebby]

Okay, I know we're all dissecting wording, but it's hard not to lol!

Curious as to why KR says 'they are trying to move this case along as quickly as they can'. That gives me the impression they (him and DG) want this settled and done with. That doesn't give me the innocent vibe, but again, I'm probably reading too much into it :gash:


ETA - 1/3 civilian witnesses and 2/3 police witnesses?? So less physical evidence? That doesn't sound good almost... Police can testify what they saw. Civilians can too. Seems strange...

I wonder if "police witnesses" is a catch-all phrase to include anyone related to LE including those who conducted forensic testing?

In any case, I'm not surprised at the ratio of civilians to police - a circumstantial case, IMO, lacks those civilians who were standing there watching the perp perpetrate the crime. A case that has been built brick by brick will entail a lot,of experts, IMO.

 

[Cherchri]

Those of you that theorize that there was an accomplice, how does that play into the investigation? Specifically, do you think LE got tunnel vision and gave up before exploring other avenues?

I ask because from what I know from family in LE, more specifically homicide, CPS detectives are among the most respected in the country. Their closure rate is above the national average and they are some of the most professional investigators in the business. I have never known them to have tunnel vision, in fact, they specifically work separate angles to avoid such problems.

I have been exploring the possibility of an accomplice but I can assure you I do not view LE as having tunnel vision. I greatly admire the tremendous effort that has gone into this case. As I mentioned a day or two back this was a massive deployment. The handling of press conferences was also sensitive and responsible and so very well and carefully done. It was exceptionally hot during the acreage and landfill searches and my heart went out to those guys. Must have been tough. Beyond tough. Emotional too. Also wanted to add.... My understanding is that LE have not stopped searching and they continue to work on this case and all possible angles - not so?

 

[Slebby]

It could get him killed on the inside or outside, oR, it will be his coup de grace (I hope I used that right) come court time, a final dagger.

IMO, knowing too much is knowing too much. Period. If DG was just a sucker who was drawn into this crime unknowingly by some badass associates, do you think his criminal buddies (who tricked him into participating) are going to take his word for it that he'll never talk? IMO, if they are such murderous thugs, they'd hardly feel any hesitation to get rid of him if he gets out, just in case. Come on, he's in danger either way.

IMO

 

[Sillybilly]

Shane Parker isn't a "newbie". He was called to the bar in 2001, was a Crown Attorney in Nova Scotia by 2002, and has been a Crown Attorney in Alberta since 2006 and Queen's Council since 2013:

http://www.canadianlawlist.com/listingdetail/contact/shane-g-parker-600465/

from Nova Scotia Chronicle-Herald, 2002:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...200-299/v05n244.txt+&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

The two men were arguing, said Crown attorney Shane Parker.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I would think of police witnesses as more physical evidence - maybe I misunderstand? They gathered evidence and attended the crime scenes so saw and collected, no? I can't imagine there could be many civilian witnesses. I know someone posted on this before but I'm still trying to figure out who they could be. The person who identified the truck? Character witnesses? The neighbour who saw the greenhouse lights on all night and burning all day the next day? An employee of one of the landfill sites? Would love to hear other suggestions. All speculative of course.

I have no idea, I could be totally be misunderstanding too! Maybe LE has to 'validate' in testimony why they searched certain locations and why so (but then I don't think they need to explain)? The ME and her/his team would have to testify also I would assume(?)

Or character witnesses involved too like you said and the other ideas you came up with, definitely seems that could be the case.

Yeah, we did briefly discuss this already, I guess I'm just so curious lol! Like you, I like to hear everyone's ideas and suggestions. It still itches at me if they found anything in that East Lake Ramp Rd area of Airdrie, that search seemed very under the radar and quiet, and I believe only the one mention of it in MSM from a small Airdrie newspaper (IIRC).

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I wonder if "police witnesses" is a catch-all phrase to include anyone related to LE including those who conducted forensic testing?

In any case, I'm not surprised at the ratio of civilians to police - a circumstantial case, IMO, lacks those civilians who were standing there watching the perp perpetrate the crime. A case that has been built brick by brick will entail a lot,of experts, IMO.

Thanks Slebby, totally didn't think of it that way! The experts/professionals (scientists/lab people, psychologists, etc.) could be considered civilians, as well as the workers/employees or neighbors like Cherchri said.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Those of you that theorize that there was an accomplice, how does that play into the investigation? Specifically, do you think LE got tunnel vision and gave up before exploring other avenues?

I ask because from what I know from family in LE, more specifically homicide, CPS detectives are among the most respected in the country. Their closure rate is above the national average and they are some of the most professional investigators in the business. I have never known them to have tunnel vision, in fact, they specifically work separate angles to avoid such problems.

I also think like Cherchri and agree with her stance - I don't think LE has tunnel vision in my reasoning for an accomplice and I also highly respect them and don't think they've made a mistake.

If there is a second accomplice, it's my opinion that they know this and are either currently surveilling them to obtain evidence or they simply don't know where to find this person. They also wouldn't let the public know this because they aren't a threat to the public and know that by keeping it quiet that person will rest on their laurels, feel 'free', relax and make some mistakes.

 

[deugirtni]

I saw that also sillybilly, and I'm wondering.. is it not unusual for a lawyer just called to the bar one year earlier, to become a crown attorney? I would have thought one would need a few years in the capacity of practising law before one would be qualified to take on the role of crown attorney. Just seems odd, IMHO.

Shane Parker isn't a "newbie". He was called to the bar in 2001, was a Crown Attorney in Nova Scotia by 2002, and has been a Crown Attorney in Alberta since 2006 and Queen's Council since 2013:

http://www.canadianlawlist.com/listingdetail/contact/shane-g-parker-600465/

from Nova Scotia Chronicle-Herald, 2002:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...200-299/v05n244.txt+&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

 

[Krystine]

Those of you that theorize that there was an accomplice, how does that play into the investigation? Specifically, do you think LE got tunnel vision and gave up before exploring other avenues?

I ask because from what I know from family in LE, more specifically homicide, CPS detectives are among the most respected in the country. Their closure rate is above the national average and they are some of the most professional investigators in the business. I have never known them to have tunnel vision, in fact, they specifically work separate angles to avoid such problems.

That's a really good question. To be honest, I am just a lay person with an interest in such things, not someone who can debate how the legal system works. So I'm asking, would LE have had to divulge any evidence pointing to an accomplice in disclosure? Since it is a continuing investigation as we wait for the trial, can new evidence be added as things continue to unfold?

 

[YYC Lady]

A few random thoughts...

I noticed on the timeline posted at the beginning of each thread, it's possible NO was born in sept. I wonder if they held his memorial on his birthday (that is a heartbreaking thought to me). Also, his obit never mentioned his bday and I wonder if it was to guard against potential ID theft (especially given the finer details in this case)

I assume civilian witnesses could include, JO, 911 Operator, the AL brother that showed up on scene, any neighbours who came forward later realizing they had heard things they maybe dismissed previously?
I also agree with news.talk that likely the "test drive" comment speaks to the (likely) large volume of scientific evidence such as DNA that will be presented that needs to be easily understood by a judge/jury.

To further echo a previous comment (Slebby?) I think the family has done well with the obits, keeping them focused on who these victims were before they became victims of such a violent crime. The magnitude of their loss(es) is so evident when reading the obits.

Lastly, on the news this evening they mentioned that one has to have a monthly income of less than $1588 to qualify for legal aid. Seems there are presently discussions around this going on at a provincial level.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

That's a really good question. To be honest, I am just a lay person with an interest in such things, not someone who can debate how the legal system works. So I'm asking, would LE have had to divulge any evidence pointing to an accomplice in disclosure? Since it is a continuing investigation as we wait for the trial, can new evidence be added as things continue to unfold?

Good question also Krystine! I'd love to know if they legally have to disclose and let the defence know if they're surveilling another suspect…

IIRC I thought someone posted on here that disclosure evidence can keep coming in right up until trial and even during I think(?) Bad memory me though, so not sure.

 

[Sillybilly]

I saw that also sillybilly, and I'm wondering.. is it not unusual for a lawyer just called to the bar one year earlier, to become a crown attorney? I would have thought one would need a few years in the capacity of practising law before one would be qualified to take on the role of crown attorney. Just seems odd, IMHO.

I was surprised at that too, but we don't know the circumstances that got him the job that quickly. May have something to do with where he articled, he may have been seen as a quick study, or maybe he was the only one who applied for the job, LOL. Regardless, he has 12 years under his belt as a prosecutor and is certainly not a newb.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

A few random thoughts...

I noticed on the timeline posted at the beginning of each thread, it's possible NO was born in sept. I wonder if they held his memorial on his birthday (that is a heartbreaking thought to me). Also, his obit never mentioned his bday and I wonder if it was to guard against potential ID theft (especially given the finer details in this case)

I assume civilian witnesses could include, JO, 911 Operator, the AL brother that showed up on scene, any neighbours who came forward later realizing they had heard things they maybe dismissed previously?
I also agree with news.talk that likely the "test drive" comment speaks to the (likely) large volume of scientific evidence such as DNA that will be presented that needs to be easily understood by a judge/jury.

To further echo a previous comment (Slebby?) I think the family has done well with the obits, keeping them focused on who these victims were before they became victims of such a violent crime. The magnitude of their loss(es) is so evident when reading the obits.

Lastly, on the news this evening they mentioned that one has to have a monthly income of less than $1588 to qualify for legal aid. Seems there are presently discussions around this going on at a provincial level.

Great post YYC Lady, you touched on some good topics with helpful comments.

And all the obits sure were touching, definitely gave us outsiders a sense of what types of people they were with few words. The poor families, what a loss.

 

[Sillybilly]

Good question also Krystine! I'd love to know if they legally have to disclose and let the defence know if they're surveilling another suspect…

IIRC I thought someone posted on here that disclosure evidence can keep coming in right up until trial and even during I think(?) Bad memory me though, so not sure.

Here's a good article on the obligations and limitations on obligation to disclose as per the Ontario AG's office. Shouldn't be any different in other provinces, but perhaps someone can find a similar article specific to AB:

http://www.criminallawyers.ca/members/sharedocs/docs/March2006/PM_2005_No_35.pdf

Section 7(d)

Crown counsel may provide the defence with access to copies of particular items from the investigation file whenever necessary to preserve the integrity of the originals. When arranging to give the defence access to the investigating agency’s file, Crown counsel should consult with the investigating agency and take any other reasonable steps necessary to protect:

• the safety, security or freedom from harassment of people who have provided information to the authorities (including addresses and telephone numbers, as discussed in s. 2(b) of this PM, “ Limitations on the Obligation to Disclose”
• any ongoing police investigations or investigative techniques; or
• any other legal privilege or protection that may apply to the material.

<bbm>

And yes, disclosure is an ongoing process up to and including trial or while an appeal is in process, even down to exculpatory information that may come in post-trial, post-appeal, etc

 

[stan laurel]

IMO, knowing too much is knowing too much. Period. If DG was just a sucker who was drawn into this crime unknowingly by some badass associates, do you think his criminal buddies (who tricked him into participating) are going to take his word for it that he'll never talk? IMO, if they are such murderous thugs, they'd hardly feel any hesitation to get rid of him if he gets out, just in case. Come on, he's in danger either way.

IMO

you agreed with my first line of thinking but the second line, as in, he is waiting to put further shame come court time by outing the second.

oddly enough, he is safer where he is now than any place regardless of an accomplice. can you imagine if he were acquitted?

 

[Tinkerbel1]

I was responding to Lala's post where they wondered if it was gossip and I provided a source that indicated it was not gossip because it came from a family member.

Oh! So sorry Silly Billy! I guess I missed some posts today. I took your comment a different way, my apologies. :sorry: