Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #18

[deugirtni]

Some don't feel as certain as you do.

As you know I believe the reason to be that there are no bodies left to be found and I feel sure they found evidence to that effect.

 

[deugirtni]

Actually, we have really no clue what other Mexican connections there may be in this case. If there was a sighting report, or multiple sighting reports, or a report from a Mexican authority of some kind, perhaps involving a sighting or a passport use, or something seen on one of the airport video cameras, or many things we might not even think of, LE may have had reason to go there to ensure they checked out every possibility from all of their leads they received in this case which I believe I read at one time totalled 700? 900? To leave a 'lead' open and uninvestigated would leave LE open to a big hole of possibilities when it comes time for trial and the defense tries to use those possibilities as proof the trio are not dead.

The only Mexico connection between Garland, Liknes and Mexico is the joint purchase of a condo.

"Police later sent officers to Mexico to investigate a possible Mexican connection to the case, but they would not confirm what exactly they were checking out."

http://globalnews.ca/news/1642914/n...ies-of-nathan-obrien-and-grandparents-police/

 

[deugirtni]

Chief Hanson's statement is quoted below. It is definitely not a fact that the trio are dead. It is a fact that they are presumed dead. It is a fact that LE believe them to be dead. It is a fact that LE has said they are dead, matter of factly, but it is still not a fact that they are dead.

"The preponderance of evidence is such that it has led our investigators to believe that they are dead."

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Arrest+Liknes+Brien+missing+pers ons+case+murder+charges+pending+Graphic/10029302/story.html

Chief Hanson was very clear when he stated that it is a fact that the three are deceased. There may be doubt in this discussion about whether the victims were determined to be deceased, but there is no doubt for investigators. For investigators, it was a fact that the victims were deceased when they saw the crime scene, but they waited for DNA confirmation before making that information public.

I don't think it will be simple for the defence to suggest that the victims are alive. The crime scene and DNA evidence confirmed that they are deceased. I suspect that there are also photos of the victims in the back of Garland's truck - perhaps wrapped in bedding from the Parkhill house.

The CPS would not spend money to send investigators to Mexico to look for anything if it was not related to the murder. The only connection between the accused, the victims, and Mexico is the condo.

The Liknes couple also said that they were moving to Northern Alberta, yet we have not heard that police were looking for the couple in Northern Alberta. Police are not running around looking in all the places that they may be just to rule out that they may be alive. Police know that they are dead and they went to Mexico to investigate something related to the murders.

 

[deugirtni]

I would surely hope that LE did make a trip to Edmonton also, isn't that where the L's were also said to have purchased a home? In my humble opinion, that would be poor police work if they did not find out details of this property and go and inspect it. I believe it is also LE's duty to follow up on every lead, every clue, they are given in any case (if they are doing a good job at least). I don't believe it is right that they can just follow up on the tips and clues that follow the same direction as they believe the case should go in. MOO.

... The Liknes couple also said that they were moving to Northern Alberta, yet we have not heard that police were looking for the couple in Northern Alberta. Police are not running around looking in all the places that they may be just to rule out that they may be alive. Police know that they are dead and they went to Mexico to investigate something related to the murders.

 

[deugirtni]

I was thinking about this last night and haven't had a chance to post, and perhaps it is ridiculous, but considering the amount of funds that would have been spent in this case, why not? If they (LE) have collected CCTV recordings from various businesses during the time period in question, which is really relatively short, a matter of 12 hours, then surely they must have seen his truck leaving... and passing... where? I wonder if they went in all possible directions, along all possible routes, to ask for recordings. If they did that, they may be able to determine where DG went with the bodies, if he did in fact do so. If LE had been more forthcoming with times and directions, perhaps more people and shop owners could have reviewed their own recordings, at the time, before they were recorded over, to see if this green truck was caught. This may have netted some results, and some more info on where the bodies could be. It would be virtually impossible for LE to review every single camera recording during those 12 hours, but why not release info/areas/times to the public and ask them to review their own and report to LE if they find something. Too late now, of course.

It just boggles my mind that this case was so quickly "solved" yet they cannot trace his steps to recover a location for three bodies. I wonder when and why they gave up looking.

 

[otto]

This story below states that the monies raised by Mr. Head (the gofund) were to cover funeral costs and lost work revenues, so that money was not involved in the creation of the Nathan Foundation. It goes on to say that $250,000 will be donated by the US donor each year for 4 years for a total $1,000,000 donation with which the O's are creating this Nathan Foundation. Otto, you suggested that the principal amount would remain intact while only the interest would be dispersed. I believe you stated that you heard that on a radio or TV story, because I don't believe I have seen an MSM article stating that. I suggested that the $40,000 mentioned in this same article below as being the amount to be released shortly, was too much money to be based on the interest only, considering the soonest they would have received the first $250,000 installment would have been at the time they came into contact with the donor which was in early September, and it is now going into early November, which would only be a max of 2 months interest on the first $250,000 of the donation.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/story.html?id=10331959

I'm suddenly very curious about the NC corporation/charity, and how the money is invested such that it earns such a generous interest rate. I'm also curious about which tax laws apply, and what special circumstance are in place for a corporation that donates money to benefit "disadvantaged" children in a foreign country. The corporation was set up in the week of Oct 19, 2014.

"The O’Briens will choose charities each year and give grants with the interest earned on the $1 million.

The gifts will benefit disadvantaged children with a focus on health, safety and sports.

“This charity is helping lift us up and our charities of choice,” Nathan’s mother, Jennifer O’Brien said. “So together, I think it’s a really beautiful thing.”

Registered in North Carolina, the charity’s incorporation documents said the foundation is “committed to honouring the memory of Nathan O’Brien and his legacy of compassion and kindness by helping improve the lives of children … giving them the opportunity to live, hope and pursue their dreams.”

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/parent...ity-we-re-exchanging-grief-for-hope-1.2077733

Publication of corporations registered last week:

http://www.gastongazette.com/news/business/new-businesses-getting-a-start-1.392190

 

[otto]

Chief Hanson's statement is quoted below. It is definitely not a fact that the trio are dead. It is a fact that they are presumed dead. It is a fact that LE believe them to be dead. It is a fact that LE has said they are dead, matter of factly, but it is still not a fact that they are dead.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Arrest+Liknes+Brien+missing+pers ons+case+murder+charges+pending+Graphic/10029302/story.html

I'll look for the video later, but in that video, Hanson was in no way ambiguous.

 

[otto]

I was thinking about this last night and haven't had a chance to post, and perhaps it is ridiculous, but considering the amount of funds that would have been spent in this case, why not? If they (LE) have collected CCTV recordings from various businesses during the time period in question, which is really relatively short, a matter of 12 hours, then surely they must have seen his truck leaving... and passing... where? I wonder if they went in all possible directions, along all possible routes, to ask for recordings. If they did that, they may be able to determine where DG went with the bodies, if he did in fact do so. If LE had been more forthcoming with times and directions, perhaps more people and shop owners could have reviewed their own recordings, at the time, before they were recorded over, to see if this green truck was caught. This may have netted some results, and some more info on where the bodies could be. It would be virtually impossible for LE to review every single camera recording during those 12 hours, but why not release info/areas/times to the public and ask them to review their own and report to LE if they find something. Too late now, of course.

A search was planned on the same morning that the investigation moved to the acreage. The area to be searched, IIRC, was to the North of the Parkhill property. I marked it on a map ... will look for it this afternoon. That suggests to me that the truck turned North at the T intersection. The problem is that from that intersection, it is a 2 minute drive to MacLeod Trail, which is a major freeway heading North and South, and links to East routes, within minutes. From following other cases, the KISS principal almost always works. That would suggest in and around the acreage, and possibly towards Brooks, which was a high meth use location at the time that Garland was cooking meth.

 

[ABro]

Something us Websleuthers have suspected but I don't recall it being confirmed in MSM before (unless I've forgotten which is likely) - that there were business dealings (plural), so not just the one patent dispute. Could be bad journalism too.

"CBC News earlier learned there were soured business dealings between Garland and Alvin Liknes, including a patent dispute.(BBM)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...eak-about-loss-and-leaving-a-legacy-1.2816016

Not sure why some people here are so fixated on the patent dispute when no one in the media has ever suggested this was exclusively about a seven year old patent dispute.

Yes, that was the first thing mentioned. And the information could very well have been inaccurate, which does not in any way mean that AL's son was lying, just that he didn't know or misremembered.

It's been clear from early on that police were looking at a variety of possible business connections between the accused and the Liknes'.


Just google "liknes garland business dealings" to see all the reports.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

It just boggles my mind that this case was so quickly "solved" yet they cannot trace his steps to recover a location for three bodies. I wonder when and why they gave up looking.

I agree, it's crazy to think with all the technology and resources it wouldn't be hard to locate them. But then again, we've managed to lose an airplane with Malaysia Airlines 370 still not being found. So frustrating for victims and searchers!

I'm wondering what's a normal timeframe for LE to stop searching in these types of cases? Like your question, I'm curious when and why and who makes the call to stop searching for those missing.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

There was also this which I posted upthread:

from:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...le-with-grim-puzzle/article19682368/?page=all



Doesn't indicate if the bolded part was info shared by LE or reporter's summation of their understanding.

True, it's really hard to take MSM info as gold when it might be bad wording.

We're aware of the patent, maybe the Mexico condo (but highly unlikely it was a business dealing with DG), and I'm curious what other dealings they may have had other than what we've speculated on WS.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Not sure why some people here are so fixated on the patent dispute when no one in the media has ever suggested this was exclusively about a seven year old patent dispute.

Yes, that was the first thing mentioned. And the information could very well have been inaccurate, which does not in any way mean that AL's son was lying, just that he didn't know or misremembered.

It's been clear from early on that police were looking at a variety of possible business connections between the accused and the Liknes'.


Just google "liknes garland business dealings" to see all the reports.

Oh, I'm definitely not one to fixate or believe the patent dispute was major motive at all, JMO. I've mentioned many times, i do not think business nor money was motive.

DG strikes me as the type who doesn't care about money/materialism however if his parents/sister were taken financially I could see that being motive or if DG's idea wasn't given recognition or credit. I've always felt this murder was personal, not financial.

I posted the reference more to question the 'other' (than the patent business) relationships DG possibly had with AL.

If other business dealings were happening were they legal or were they more idea/invention types as the type of business could be a stronger motive than money.

If DG felt abandoned or left holding the bag, or betrayed/deceived could be grounds for him rather than a dollar sign IMO.

 

[ABro]

Oh, I'm definitely not one to fixate or believe the patent dispute was major motive at all, JMO. I've mentioned many times, i do not think business nor money was motive.

DG strikes me as the type who doesn't care about money/materialism however if his parents/sister were taken financially I could see that being motive or if DG's idea wasn't given recognition or credit. I've always felt this murder was personal, not financial.

I posted the reference more to question the 'other' (than the patent business) relationships DG possibly had with AL.

If other business dealings were happening were they legal or were they more idea/invention types as the type of business could be a stronger motive than money.

If DG felt abandoned or left holding the bag, or betrayed/deceived could be grounds for him rather than a dollar sign IMO.

It's not an either/or situation. He can be interested in money AND feel betrayed.

people can Want money for reasons other than buying consumer goods. For some it represents proof of how smart they are. It's validation.

Why do you think this guy made meth or set up a chemical company?

 

[Lalalacasbah]

It's not an either/or situation. He can be interested in money AND feel betrayed.

people can Want money for reasons other than buying consumer goods. For some it represents proof of how smart they are. It's validation.

Why do you think this guy made meth or set up a chemical company?

I think validation is a good word you use, and true, money doesn't always equate to materialism.

I was distancing myself from a pure 'money only' motive and feel he might have been dissed, belittled or humiliated (by failure or by being blown off/jilted per se) somehow. So more of a personal ego blow or him somehow feeling that AL was unjust. I think DG felt just in committing this crime for some reason.

Do I think AL made meth? No. Do I think AL set up a chemical company? No. Do I think they both were involved in some type of business creations on paper to appear legit and money hiding/laundering? Unfortunately I do, IMO. Do I think they both had their hands in an under the table cookie jar? I do.

I don't want to say this about the victim, as I don't want to taint his character, this is only my speculation. Regardless if people's business practices are 'clean or dirty' no one had a right to murder anyone to teach them a lesson, which I think is what DG felt he did.

 

[LoisLane]

I think validation is a good word you use, and true, money doesn't always equate to materialism.

I was distancing myself from a pure 'money only' motive and feel he might have been dissed, belittled or humiliated (by failure or by being blown off/jilted per se) somehow. So more of a personal ego blow or him somehow feeling that AL was unjust. I think DG felt just in committing this crime for some reason.

Do I think AL made meth? No. Do I think AL set up a chemical company? No. Do I think they both were involved in some type of business creations on paper to appear legit and money hiding/laundering? Unfortunately I do, IMO. Do I think they both had their hands in an under the table cookie jar? I do.

I don't want to say this about the victim, as I don't want to taint his character, this is only my speculation. Regardless if people's business practices are 'clean or dirty' no one had a right to murder anyone to teach them a lesson, which I think is what DG felt he did.

I find it even more odd that a lesson can be taught to a person who has been murdered. The short period of time in the confrontation could be the lesson. Or the lesson/message was to be forced upon a family member who is still alive such as AL.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I find it even more odd that a lesson can be taught to a person who has been murdered. The short period of time in the confrontation could be the lesson. Or the lesson/message was to be forced upon a family member who is still alive such as AL.

Of course! I don't mean to literally teach him a lesson since that would be useless when planning to murder someone.

I mean it as a figure of speech, a hypothetical example of a 'you mess with me, well I'll show (teach) you what happens when you mess with me (the wrong person)' mentality. I didn't mean for that to come out that way.

Oh.... if AL is out there somewhere, that would be a whole other ball game. I'm still leaving a crack open for that possibility! I haven't shut that door yet. I keep trying to go in other directions and let that one rest for awhile, even though it's always in my mind too.

 

[ABro]

I find it even more odd that a lesson can be taught to a person who has been murdered. The short period of time in the confrontation could be the lesson. Or the lesson/message was to be forced upon a family member who is still alive such as AL.

Do you have any idea how serious an error it is for the police to say someone is dead when they aren't?

The idea that Calgary's police chief would state categorically that three people are dead when they aren't is beyond ridiculous.

The families have held services for the deceased and yet here on Websleuths people keep insisting, based on not a shred of evidence, that maybe they're not dead.

 

[ABro]

My opinion and speculation isn't meant to taint the victim although people might take it that way, it's not meant to at all.

TONS of people cut corners in life, lie on resumes, expand truths, make under the table money, collect government subsidies when they don't need it, cheat on stocks (Martha Stewart), misuse/spend tax dollars (politicians). That doesn't make them wicked or evil people, it's just frowned upon by most, but not everyone, some consider it fair game. Most folks wants to get ahead in life, some find different ways to do so.

MSM did say there were business dealings between them - so if we can't find ANY public info or knowledge (yet) other than the patent linking the two and JO didn't know DG existed (and presumably KL as JO stated), then I think it's fair to hypothesize they might possibly have had a secret business relationship unknown to others. It's not that scandalous a thought.

It's been reported that they had business dealings that went bad, not that these dealings were "secret."

JO didn't know DG existed. She presumes KL didn't but she doesn't know so I do not accept your hypothesis that KL did not know DG, especially in light of the first degree murder charges. Maybe she knew him, maybe she didn't.

[modsnip]

 

[LoisLane]

Do you have any idea how serious an error it is for the police to say someone is dead when they aren't?

The idea that Calgary's police chief would state categorically that three people are dead when they aren't is beyond ridiculous.

The families have held services for the deceased and yet here on Websleuths people keep insisting, based on not a shred of evidence, that maybe they're not dead.

Oops! I should have clarified, I meant the son AL. Possibly DG could have demonstrated his revenge/lesson and directed a message or some sort of reality check towards his brother-in-law AL.

I have never accused or will accuse LE of making false statements. They have enough evidence to lay charges. That is sensible for me to understand. They certainly can make mistakes, but I am not mixing the two up. I am quite rational in my way of thinking.

 

[LoisLane]

Of course! I don't mean to literally teach him a lesson since that would be useless when planning to murder someone.

I mean it as a figure of speech, a hypothetical example of a 'you mess with me, well I'll show (teach) you what happens when you mess with me (the wrong person)' mentality. I didn't mean for that to come out that way.

Oh.... if AL is out there somewhere, that would be a whole other ball game. I'm still leaving a crack open for that possibility! I haven't shut that door yet. I keep trying to go in other directions and let that one rest for awhile, even though it's always in my mind too.

I should have clarified which AL I was speaking of... I meant DG's brother-in-law AL. I know you are speaking hypothetical, I hope I did not come across as challenging what you said, I was bouncing off of it.

Anyway let's say AL Sr. was out there... That would be quite the scandal that would have required master-planning and some sort of major pay-off. A whole other ball game indeed! ETA: I definetly keep an open mind to this and have explored it...