Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #17

[Tinkerbel1]

I'm curious how you reconcile saying the police did a remarkable job with the theory you keep propounding according to which:

1) they arrested the wrong guy for murder
2) they let the real murderers escape
3) they misinformed the public about an issue involving public safety

How much worse a job could they do?

IMO, Lois Lane was not suggesting that CPS did anything but a good job. They worked with their theories. They followed their protocols based on that theory. If their theory was incorrect, then that's another issue.

 

[ABro]

IMO, Lois Lane was not suggesting that CPS did anything but a good job. They worked with their theories. They followed their protocols based on that theory. If their theory was incorrect, then that's another issue.

Except if their theory is wrong and they arrested the wrong man while letting real killers go free, they did a freaking terrible job. Lois Lane can't have it both ways.

Saying "they worked with their theories" appears to be code for "but my theories are better."

 

[ABro]

In this theory I thing DG was involved to a degree. Possibly not murder. I am clear that I don't think they are dead. Show me proof of bodies or make a statement that blood and DNA proves it and I will reconsider. Other murderers wouldn't have gotten away unless they were assisting DG but I don't think they are dead.

CPS did a remarkable job. They committed tremendous manpower and resources and built a case piece- by-piece. They may have missed a piece or the piece just won't fit. Also, they are missing 3 pieces. The courts will sort through all that.

The police never said that the Public's safety was in jeopardy.

If they did a remarkable job, but missed all sorts of pieces that you see, what does that say about your abilities?

 

[Tinkerbel1]

The accused has a pick up truck. Three injured or deceased people were removed from the Parkhill house. They wouldn't fit in the cab of the truck. I wonder how they were removed from the house? There are drag marks leading from the house to the parking spot in front of the house. I'm pretty sure that a wheel barrow wasn't used. I don't have a link for logic, but the only possibility is that they were removed in the back of the pickup truck.

Is there another way that a man with a pickup truck would remove three bodies from a crime scene?

I think you mentioned they were seen alone, or "in the back of DG's truck". Who saw them in the back of the truck? Perhaps a Uhaul was rented to transport the bodies. Maybe they were laying at the bottom of a boat that was being towed out to a lake; perhaps they were dismembered and in boxes or other containers for transport. There's no way they were in the back of that pick-up truck, unless a canopy or tonneau cover were put on the truck...and that, we have no photos of. Logically or otherwise, we have absolutely no idea how those victims got out of the Parkhill home. None. JMO

 

[Tinkerbel1]

If they did a remarkable job, but missed all sorts of pieces that you see, what does that say about your abilities?

It says that they were following a particular theory to their best ability; and that they are human beings fully capable of human error, as we all are. That, even by their own admission, was a very large, difficult investigation. Hundreds of officers/resources were involved. Huge margin for error. Again, no one said CPS/RCMP did a bad job. Their efforts were, and still are remarkable. Olympic athletes all go out with highest intentions and putting their best foot forward in order to do their best run/triathalon/swim/etc ever. They may do a remarkable job, but not everyone wins. The level of effort and investigation by LE is no less than remarkable, however, there may be a possibility that they have not hit the nail on the head. JMO

Oh! I just now saw that you are questioning LL's abilities...and not LE's. LL is not required to justify her abilities as LE are, she has also not questioned LE's abilities or maligned LE. She distinctly said, "LE are doing a remarkable job". There must be some misunderstanding on your part as to her quote.

 

[LoisLane]

If they did a remarkable job, but missed all sorts of pieces that you see, what does that say about your abilities?

I wish I could "see" the 3 missing pieces. My abilities are not going to matter at trial.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Except if their theory is wrong and they arrested the wrong man while letting real killers go free, they did a freaking terrible job. Lois Lane can't have it both ways.

Saying "they worked with their theories" appears to be code for "but my theories are better."

Since there are no bodies, and since there has been no disclosure of the evidence publicly, and since everything in this case is either vague, convoluted or under wraps until the trial...there is definitely room for the speculation or deduction that perhaps there are no killer(s).

Saying "they worked with their theories" is in no way code for anything. It is fact. They have nothing else to work with but their theories and deductions. Perhaps LE has this same theory as well and are working on it. We have no way of knowing any of that.

PS...I don't do code, I usually just say things pretty clearly.

 

[stan laurel]

BBM

What sort of chemicals were at the acreage belonging to the parents of the accused that could be used to make people disappear, and how are those chemical different than what is normally found on a farm, or in an urban household?

by bbm'ing a line from a post, one essentially changes the context of what one is saying. anyhoo.

all farms have caustic chemicals,, round-up if ingested will turn your insides to mush. the point is, every household and farm has some evidence to suggest a type of murder,, my neighbor is a bow hunter, he has an abattoir in his garage and a vacuum packing system where he can butcher and reduce his kill into nice little sealed packs of meat to tidily fit in his freezer.

the one thing that LE did that made me laugh was the grandstanding that became a caricature of over thinking; bringing the zodiac with the huge motor to the slough. obviously some people on the force have spent far too much time in the city as not only could you not put a boat that size in a slough, but it would destroy possible evidence once you put the throttle into forward. secondly, it would have made more sense to start the investigation in the air as field crop and any/all paths taken in recent or past could have been discerned, instead they had lines of boots on ground crushing such evidence away. (I should mention that recently I did a re-hike into an area that I had been into around June and my original path through prairie grassland was there as if the path had just been made on my second trip. Human paths differ from deer paths or coyote paths, fox, et al,, CPS should have taken pics from above before trampling on.)

I respect LE but that does not mean I have to be a non-critical sycophant.

 

[ABro]

Since there are no bodies, and since there has been no disclosure of the evidence publicly, and since everything in this case is either vague, convoluted or under wraps until the trial...there is definitely room for the speculation or deduction that perhaps there are no killer(s).

Saying "they worked with their theories" is in no way code for anything. It is fact. They have nothing else to work with but their theories and deductions. Perhaps LE has this same theory as well and are working on it. We have no way of knowing any of that.

PS...I don't do code, I usually just say things pretty clearly.

Here's the thing. You can speculate all you want but you have ZERO evidence, which puts you in a whole different category from those who do have evidence and are working with facts. And those people say they have their guy and are not -- like you -- looking for other suspects.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Except if their theory is wrong and they arrested the wrong man while letting real killers go free, they did a freaking terrible job. Lois Lane can't have it both ways.

Saying "they worked with their theories" appears to be code for "but my theories are better."

IMO, it doesn't mean that LE did a freaking terrible job. It simply means they did the best they could in that moment with the information they had. My goodness, this case has them running in hundreds of different directions. If someone misses the mark, it doesn't mean its a complete failure, nor does it mean that it can't go back on and be corrected. It means that perhaps what seemed obvious and logical at the time, after more investigation, no longer is valid. For now, there has to be the ability to look at it both ways, we have no choice but to consider ALL the options. We don't have all the information yet.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Here's the thing. You can speculate all you want but you have ZERO evidence, which puts you in a whole different category from those who do have evidence and are working with facts. And those people say they have their guy and are not -- like you -- looking for other suspects.

As far as we know. There's nothing like new discovery...that's how things are created. And, did you know that nothing is ever created without friction? Necessity is the mother of invention as they say, and I would submit that in this case, nothing is straight-forward nor cut and dried. You may be (or may not be) very surprised at the final results of this case, as might I...or not.

As a reminder, we all have ZERO evidence, we have what we have been told, which is not much.

As a child, I was told that thunder was the sound of the 'angels bowling'. I'm long past believing everything I hear, no matter who it comes from. No one is the Higher Power, no one is the Creator of the Universe and I, like Lois Lane, will believe it when I see it or it is beyond a shadow of a doubt....proven. And I don't mean 'reasonable' doubt, I mean a 'shadow'. If LE could solve crimes back in the day correctly without aids such as DNA testing, and various other high-tech methods, etc (as news.talk has mentioned of her father), then there should be no reason to believe there will be a problem solving this one. When it is solved, it'll be solved. Until then, it is definitely open to all possibilities.

 

[LoisLane]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/w...+accused+trolling+parents/10266314/story.html

Is this woman who was found dead a WS contributor? Does WS have a forum for Madeleine McCann? Very scary!

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Here's the thing. You can speculate all you want but you have ZERO evidence, which puts you in a whole different category from those who do have evidence and are working with facts. And those people say they have their guy and are not -- like you -- looking for other suspects.

You are absolutely correct! I am in a different category...as are you, unless you're privy to forensic information thru LE? Yes, those say they have their guy, and it just might be angels bowling when it's thundering. One never knows.

 

[LoisLane]

Local Calgary News

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/10/0...gpin--victim-faced-charges-in-1m-meth-seizure

 

[ABro]

As a reminder, we all have ZERO evidence, we have what we have been told, which is not much.

Wrong, you and I have zero evidence. The police have evidence. The crown has evidence. The accused has evidence. His attorney as evidence.

As a child, I was told that thunder was the sound of the 'angels bowling'. I'm long past believing everything I hear, no matter who it comes from. No one is the Higher Power, no one is the Creator of the Universe and I, like Lois Lane, will believe it when I see it or it is beyond a shadow of a doubt....proven. And I don't mean 'reasonable' doubt, I mean a 'shadow'.

No one said you should believe everything you hear -- just that if you expect anyone to listen to you should get some facts to back up your feelings. If there's a wrongful prosecution happening, why wait for the trial? Get the facts out in the media so your guy can get out of jail.

Reasonable doubt is a standard that has been established based on centuries of jurisprudence. You might want to take that one up with the legal philosophers and various supreme courts. There are good reasons why that's the standard.

 

[ABro]

IMO, it doesn't mean that LE did a freaking terrible job. It simply means they did the best they could in that moment with the information they had. My goodness, this case has them running in hundreds of different directions. If someone misses the mark, it doesn't mean its a complete failure, nor does it mean that it can't go back on and be corrected. It means that perhaps what seemed obvious and logical at the time, after more investigation, no longer is valid. For now, there has to be the ability to look at it both ways, we have no choice but to consider ALL the options. We don't have all the information yet.

Sorry but in order for there to be a wrongful prosecution, lots of people have to make lots of serious mistakes, and the system's checks and balances have to fail. Look at any of the famous wrongful prosecution cases in Canada, and you will see massive incompetence and ass covering. One person having a bad day doesn't lead to arresting the wrong guy, telling the public the case is solved when it isn't, and letting the real killers escape.

I find it a little strange how the posters who think the wrong guy's in jail are so reluctant to accept the corollary that if their theory's correct, the police work here is a massive fail.

After all the other suspects could be out there killing more people or kidnapping children...

 

[deugirtni]

Excellent explanation.

by bbm'ing a line from a post, one essentially changes the context of what one is saying. anyhoo.

all farms have caustic chemicals,, round-up if ingested will turn your insides to mush. the point is, every household and farm has some evidence to suggest a type of murder,, my neighbor is a bow hunter, he has an abattoir in his garage and a vacuum packing system where he can butcher and reduce his kill into nice little sealed packs of meat to tidily fit in his freezer.

the one thing that LE did that made me laugh was the grandstanding that became a caricature of over thinking; bringing the zodiac with the huge motor to the slough. obviously some people on the force have spent far too much time in the city as not only could you not put a boat that size in a slough, but it would destroy possible evidence once you put the throttle into forward. secondly, it would have made more sense to start the investigation in the air as field crop and any/all paths taken in recent or past could have been discerned, instead they had lines of boots on ground crushing such evidence away. (I should mention that recently I did a re-hike into an area that I had been into around June and my original path through prairie grassland was there as if the path had just been made on my second trip. Human paths differ from deer paths or coyote paths, fox, et al,, CPS should have taken pics from above before trampling on.)

I respect LE but that does not mean I have to be a non-critical sycophant.

 

[deugirtni]

Why do some seem so personally invested in blindly supporting LE's theory at this point, when nothing has been released to the public? This is an usual case with many twists and turns and players with very little information, and so I would think it fairly normal for the many who are interested in the fate of these 3 missing people to speculate based on what IS known. The worst that can happen is that the speculators waste their time and end up being wrong. The best that can happen is that perhaps a speculator's theory might spark a far-away little thought in someone else, perhaps something worth pursuing, and it ends up in more concrete evidence, or another avenue to pursue and follow up on. I think that most don't have a vested interest in the outcome of the hows or whos or whys, but rather, most just want the facts and justice to be served, whatever the facts may be. Until the facts are known, whatever facts there might be, 'sleuthing' is what we do here on WS.[modsnip] MOO.

Here's the thing. You can speculate all you want but you have ZERO evidence, which puts you in a whole different category from those who do have evidence and are working with facts. And those people say they have their guy and are not -- like you -- looking for other suspects.

 

[LoisLane]

Sorry but in order for there to be a wrongful prosecution, lots of people have to make lots of serious mistakes, and the system's checks and balances have to fail. Look at any of the famous wrongful prosecution cases in Canada, and you will see massive incompetence and ass covering. One person having a bad day doesn't lead to arresting the wrong guy, telling the public the case is solved when it isn't, and letting the real killers escape.

I find it a little strange how the posters who think the wrong guy's in jail are so reluctant to accept the corollary that if their theory's correct, the police work here is a massive fail. Maybe the "real suspects" are out there killing more people...

I think DG is in jail because he has been linked to the disappearance and charged with the murder of the 3 missing people. It is not the job of police to prosecute, they have to find enough evidence to lay the charges. LE stated they put the case together piece-by-piece-by-piece and I think that it could be possible that one or more of the pieces won't fit. I think DG was involved to some degree and it is my theory that it could have been to assist them in leaving the country. DG was arrested for the fraudulent identification and although those charges are currently stayed I think DG is simply taking this time to serve time and apply it to those charges when they are brought up again. So, if the Crown can not prove the case he will already have time-served that can be applied to the identity charges and he will be free to go. I think DG has considered this and he is willing to take that chance.

I am aware that there are flaws in this theory because of the arrest of DG for murder. But when I look at what information has been made available to the public regarding his arrest and the lack of bodies and possibly lack of DNA and blood I am not convinced that this will all fit. Of course, we the public are not privy to such details but the way they presented the charges to the public left a lot of room for my questions and doubt. That is what I am going on.

I also have doubts with my theory that they are alive and the only piece that sticks out in my mind is the claim that GH (family friend) made about JO seeing lots of blood. I do consider that and wonder if that was a valid statement.

 

[LoisLane]

Two of the condo's directly across the street from the Liknes home are now for sale. I wonder if they are both the front street view to the L home.