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

[deugirtni]

I am having trouble find *any* info on 'Vecto Resource Services', other than hits that come up involving this case. Also, the 'BC' fellow.... you don't think that is the same fellow who is all over the news in relation to our PM do you?

 

[Cherchri]

I am having trouble find *any* info on 'Vecto Resource Services', other than hits that come up involving this case. Also, the 'BC' fellow.... you don't think that is the same fellow who is all over the news in relation to our PM do you?

I am delving. Shady. Just search by his name without Vecto and his many "ventures" will be revealed. Pages and pages of articles will give you bed time reading for months if I find a link that definitively shows his ties to Vecto as well as everything else, I will share it here. BC was the former head of EPIC here in Calgary and was fired from that position. He has just been through a trial of his own. Again. Not the same BC. Believe this is the BC quoted https://www.linkedin.com/profile/vi...targetId:37792863,VSRPcmpt:primary&_mSplash=1

 

[deugirtni]

I couldn't find any mention of Vecto in regard to the shady fellow. Let us know what you dig up.

 

[deugirtni]

I am confused about one of the points in a news article at some point.. I *was sure* I had read that ALjr had not seen DG for 4 years, at a thanksgiving dinner 4 years ago.. but then there is also reference to him seeing him at a thanksgiving dinner 1 year ago.. am I mistaken about the '4 years ago' reference? Does anyone know the news article I am *thinking* about which said 4 years ago?

In any case, I believe the reports have never waivered from him stating that he believed it had been 7 years since AL had had contact with DG.

 

[Cherchri]

I am confused about one of the points in a news article at some point.. I *was sure* I had read that ALjr had not seen DG for 4 years, at a thanksgiving dinner 4 years ago.. but then there is also reference to him seeing him at a thanksgiving dinner 1 year ago.. am I mistaken about the '4 years ago' reference? Does anyone know the news article I am *thinking* about which said 4 years ago?

In any case, I believe the reports have never waivered from him stating that he believed it had been 7 years since AL had had contact with DG.

Al Jr was interviewed by the press outside the court and stated he thought DG and AL had not seen one another for x years. He, AL Jr had last seen DG at Thanksgiving 2013 on the Airdrie acreage. Several reporters got that muddled as I recall and several sleuthers then got it muddled here as a result.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Digestive and cookie should not be used in the same sentence. Years ago in Burnaby, there was a grocery store that had a cafeteria, so someone came up with the brilliant idea to combine the two words and rename the place, wait for it, wait for it,,






The Grocerteria.

Not the greatest alignment of letters in my opinion. makes one scrunch their nose and squint like one does while cutting into under cooked liver coated in a far too pale gravy.

Back on subject,, the key director you can sleuth was part of Vecto,, I'm still trying to find Winterpet directors,, the CEO is easy enough to find but the board is a whole other thing.

Liver!!!! uke:

 

[Tinkerbel1]

I am confused about one of the points in a news article at some point.. I *was sure* I had read that ALjr had not seen DG for 4 years, at a thanksgiving dinner 4 years ago.. but then there is also reference to him seeing him at a thanksgiving dinner 1 year ago.. am I mistaken about the '4 years ago' reference? Does anyone know the news article I am *thinking* about which said 4 years ago?

In any case, I believe the reports have never waivered from him stating that he believed it had been 7 years since AL had had contact with DG.

I was of the same impression regarding the 4 years Thanksgiving dinner, read that very near the beginning of the case in an article. Could try and find it for you.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

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


....

So, the Prosecution isn't even thinking that far ahead to the trial yet....interesting way to put it..."you don't get to the playoffs until you get through the regular season". There's some more professionalism for you from the Crown. "In a case like this I was against direct indictment"...why? If the evidence is all there...I really don't get it. Get in there, present your case, lock him away for as long as possible and be done with this. :/
Wonder why Parker didn't go directly to the playoffs? They've got enough evidence...why waste time and money? But then again, Matthew DeGrood has a preliminary inquiry as well...and he got caught pretty much red-handed, plus there were bodies. Wonder why DeGrood gets the preliminary inquiry? Is this where the defense would be presenting him as NCR?

 

[Cherchri]

I couldn't find any mention of Vecto in regard to the shady fellow. Let us know what you dig up.

Phew! Not the same BC. I believe this to be the BC quoted in the National Post https://www.linkedin.com/profile/vi...targetId:37792863,VSRPcmpt:primary&_mSplash=1

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Not sure what warranted the barrage of information and bolding in response to my post. From what I can determine, everything you bolded is about a test drive of the evidence:

"test the strength of the Crown’s case" (Crown's case is all based on evidence and if it's not strong enough in the test drive, the case gets dismissed; if it's strong enough, the accused gets committed to trial)

"to protect the accused from a needless, and indeed, improper, exposure to public trial where the enforcement agency is not in possession of evidence to warrant the continuation of the process" (not enough evidence from the Crown and the case gets dismissed against the accused)

"It is an "expeditious charge-screening mechanism" (screening/test [drive] of the evidence required to support the charge and going on to trial)

"you will have a preliminary inquiry only if you or the prosecutor requests one" (not really sure why that is bolded, but because either one can request a test drive of the evidence against the accused, it's an equal opportunity)

God forbid that SP used the word "drive" ... humanicus horribilus :biggrin:

Yes, actually, in my mind it is counsel horribilus.

"Test the strength of the evidence" and "test drive" the evidence to me, mean 2 different things. It's not a 'test drive'. To me that's rude and disrespectful. If you want to talk like that in your office amongst your colleagues, by all means, knock yourself out, but don't blow off something as important as this with your casual remarks. Grab some professionalism.

I've provided the information to illustrate the "meanings" of the reasons for the preliminary inquiry.

SP had mentioned something about the Crown choosing to go ahead with this...I'm simply pointing out that the decision isn't only up to the Crown. DG has a RIGHT to the preliminary inquiry and could have chosen it as well. SP mentions that he chose not to go directly to indictment in a case such as this...again, it's not all about the Prosecution. The Defense has a say in it as well. That's why it was bolded.

If we're going to talk about a case, and if we're going to hold people to 'links' and using "exact" and "proper" phrases and comments, then it's only fair that protocol be extended throughout all conversation. Lets not have double-standards. JMO

 

[Cherchri]

Yes, actually, in my mind it is counsel horribilus.

"Test the strength of the evidence" and "test drive" the evidence to me, mean 2 different things. It's not a 'test drive'. To me that's rude and disrespectful. If you want to talk like that in your office amongst your colleagues, by all means, knock yourself out, but don't blow off something as important as this with your casual remarks. Grab some professionalism.

I've provided the information to illustrate the "meanings" of the reasons for the preliminary inquiry.

SP had mentioned something about the Crown choosing to go ahead with this...I'm simply pointing out that the decision isn't only up to the Crown. DG has a RIGHT to the preliminary inquiry and could have chosen it as well. SP mentions that he chose not to go directly to indictment in a case such as this...again, it's not all about the Prosecution. The Defense has a say in it as well. That's why it was bolded.

If we're going to talk about a case, and if we're going to hold people to 'links' and using "exact" and "proper" phrases and comments, then it's only fair that protocol be extended throughout all conversation. Lets not have double-standards. JMO

There is EVERY possibility the prosecutor said "test the evidence" and was misquoted. The MMS often use copy from other media sources when they didn't have a reporter on the scene and then the misquote becomes widely spread. I agree totally inappropriate lingo. Just want to give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

There is EVERY possibility the prosecutor said "test the evidence" and was misquoted. The MMS often use copy from other media sources when they didn't have a reporter on the scene and then the misquote becomes widely spread. I agree totally inappropriate lingo. Just want to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I sure hope this is the case.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

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 no doubt that your family members and other members of LE, and CPS detectives are among the most respected in the country. Edmonton has some of the finest as well. We also have those that steal from home break-in investigations, and play with evidence in the evidence rooms, we also have those that DUI, we also have those that beat their wives and girlfriends, and use excessive force on civilians when arresting them, so again, you've got the good with the not-so-good. Having said that, that's not even the point I want to make. (These comments above were made verbally to me on 2 different occasions, by 2 different sets of police officers...including the names of their colleagues that did it....they actually were laughing about it).

Have you ever sat around a campfire telling ghost stories? Have you ever watched the Blair Witch Project, or Paranormal Activity? Have you ever gotten freaked out for a time after because of what you've heard, and your imagination builds on what you've seen/heard/etc? That's a form of tunnel-vision. Sometimes a story (or a theory) can take on a life of it's own...we've seen it on here...and suddenly everyone is looking at the same thing...sometimes we get 'boxed in' to a way of thinking and forget to look at other options, angles or even question what the truth is...we just jump on the bandwagon. I'm sorry, that is human nature and very, very possible. Another thing that humans do a lot of (LE or otherwise), is tend to NOT be the lone wolf in situations...most will keep their mouths shut and their heads down if they are outnumbered in opinions that are not in alignment with the majority perceive or believe. They look the other way.

The theory of an accomplice is not a difficult one to find feasible. It makes more sense than DG acting on his own...infinitely more sense...and it's a distinct possibility. One that should not be ruled out.

Just my personal experience and opinion.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Charming ... a little off topic, but does anyone here know how to lance a boil?

OMG! Yuck! You and Stan talk about such gross things! :gasp:

Put a hot compress on it, sterilize a scalpel or small knife and lance it (if you poke it with a pin or needle that works too)..let it drain and sop up the pus with a compress...be sure not to tough the compress as its very contagious fluid...clean with rubbing alcohol or peroxide, followed by an antimicrobial or antibiotic cream on it after. Cover with gauze and tape.

Enjoy!

 

[deugirtni]

Ok I found at least one of the articles in which it was stated that ALJr had not seen DG for 4 years:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/07/16/nathan-obriens-uncle-faces-grim-possibility-brother-in-law-douglas-garland-murdered-parents-and-nephew/

 

[Tinkerbel1]

I hear you, and that's pretty funny. I don't think president's choice sells the ones with that special ingredient.

lol...ummm, probably not :/

 

[Tinkerbel1]

No, I wouldn't dream of it...it's great comic relief! And these threads need that sometime.

No, No...he means a different kind of boil! lol

 

[news.talk]

I have no doubt that your family members and other members of LE, and CPS detectives are among the most respected in the country. Edmonton has some of the finest as well. We also have those that steal from home break-in investigations, and play with evidence in the evidence rooms, we also have those that DUI, we also have those that beat their wives and girlfriends, and use excessive force on civilians when arresting them, so again, you've got the good with the not-so-good. Having said that, that's not even the point I want to make. (These comments above were made verbally to me on 2 different occasions, by 2 different sets of police officers...including the names of their colleagues that did it....they actually were laughing about it).

Have you ever sat around a campfire telling ghost stories? Have you ever watched the Blair Witch Project, or Paranormal Activity? Have you ever gotten freaked out for a time after because of what you've heard, and your imagination builds on what you've seen/heard/etc? That's a form of tunnel-vision. Sometimes a story (or a theory) can take on a life of it's own...we've seen it on here...and suddenly everyone is looking at the same thing...sometimes we get 'boxed in' to a way of thinking and forget to look at other options, angles or even question what the truth is...we just jump on the bandwagon. I'm sorry, that is human nature and very, very possible. Another thing that humans do a lot of (LE or otherwise), is tend to NOT be the lone wolf in situations...most will keep their mouths shut and their heads down if they are outnumbered in opinions that are not in alignment with the majority perceive or believe. They look the other way.

The theory of an accomplice is not a difficult one to find feasible. It makes more sense than DG acting on his own...infinitely more sense...and it's a distinct possibility. One that should not be ruled out.

Just my personal experience and opinion.

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.

 

[Power of Two]

What are thoughts on this..? If DG lived for a significant length of time out West and used the MH alias for years, did he completely assume that new name? Or did he use it only when it suited him ie: employment situations? If he used it for 'convenience', I would speculate that it could be confusing and tiresome to keep switching back and forth. If he assumed it totally and completely for his new persona, did he ever 'slip up' and inadvertently use his real name? The big question for me, though, is did anyone in his immediate family know/suspect/have a hunch that he was operating in any fashion with the MH alias??? Did he just drop out of sight out West (for years) or was he in contact with family at all? I cannot fathom that his folks would have no contact with him for that length of time. Wondering also if he had a Passport? Just wonder if he was double-dipping, so to speak??

 

[Cherchri]

Ok I found at least one of the articles in which it was stated that ALJr had not seen DG for 4 years:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/07/16/nathan-obriens-uncle-faces-grim-possibility-brother-in-law-douglas-garland-murdered-parents-and-nephew/

We saw this back on an earlier thread posted by Lori McA http://globalnews.ca/news/1438148/mi...rs-fourth-day/

From about 1:20 to 2:15 in the video...from a phone interview the reporter/news channel had with Allen:

"He doesn't believe Douglas Garland and his father Alvin Liknes had spoken in about seven years."
"Allen last saw Douglas Garland at Thanksgiving, at his in-laws last fall..."