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

[LoisLane]

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.

One could also google "Liknes Garland patent"

 

[ABro]

One could also google "Liknes Garland patent"

One could except I was responding to the claim that the MSM has confined its reports on the Liknes/Garland business dealings to the patent dispute.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...June-2014-*ARREST*-18&p=11152470#post11152470

 

[LoisLane]

One could except, I was responding to the claim that the MSM has confined it's reports on the Liknes/Garland business dealings to the patent dispute.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...June-2014-*ARREST*-18&p=11152470#post11152470

My appologies, I skipped "exclusively". I will from now on read your words more carefully.

 

[LoisLane]

If you're the police, Doing your job is most assuredly not assuring the public three people are dead when they aren't.

I find it strange how those espousing theories about the LIknes' being alive also want to maintain that the police did a good job. Unfortunately, The two are mutually exclusive.

They did do a good job but that doesn't mean they are perfectly airtight. Maybe if they recovered the bodies it would be easier for me to comprehend. If the case is a mistrial or the accused is found not-guilty then we will obviously have a problem and that is not unprecedented is it?

 

[ABro]

They did do a good job but that doesn't mean they are perfectly airtight. Maybe if they recovered the bodies it would be easier for me to comprehend. If the case is a mistrial or the accused is found not-guilty then we will obviously have a problem and that is not unprecedented is it?

Not "perfectly airtight" is Hardly an accurate description for a scenario that has the Liknes' sipping Margaritas in Mexico. Freaking disaster is more like it.

For the record, I have no idea if the police did a good job because I have no idea how strong the evidence is.

 

[LoisLane]

Strong case but not "perfectly airtight" is a very different scenario from the Liknes' sipping Margaritas in Mexico. The latter is a freaking disaster.

For the record, I have no idea if the police did a good job because I have no idea how strong the evidence is.

True! I assume they did a good job because they were approved by the crown to lay the charges. I am not sure how strong the evidence will be once it has been presented in a trial.

 

[ABro]

True! I assume they did a good job because they were approved by the crown to lay the charges. I am not sure how strong the evidence will be once it has been presented in a trial.

The fact that charges were laid doesn't mean the police did a good job. See Bernardo, Pickton, etc. The police did a terrible job. Charges were still laid.

 

[LoisLane]

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/10/2...athan-obrien-childrens-foundation-take-flight

Jennifer says she and Rod have said their goodbyes to their son, but still want to know where he is — and she hopes that answer may come, perhaps after a court deals with the charges.

“His physical body, of course we hope and pray that answer will come,” said Jennifer.

“We still pray Nathan will come home.”

 

[Lalalacasbah]

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...

Oh shoot, bad me lol! I wasn't sure you if you mean Sr. or Jr. but assumed Sr.

No, I didn't take your comments as challenging and even if they were, that's okay too, we all have our thoughts and ideas

 

[Lalalacasbah]

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/10/2...athan-obrien-childrens-foundation-take-flight

Jennifer says she and Rod have said their goodbyes to their son, but still want to know where he is — and she hopes that answer may come, perhaps after a court deals with the charges.

“His physical body, of course we hope and pray that answer will come,” said Jennifer.

“We still pray Nathan will come home.”

Pure anguish (at least for me it would be). I sure hope they get their answers, they seem like such good people.

 

[stan laurel]

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

The donor does have his own foundation too and that might be where the kick start of 40k came from.

 

[Slebby]

E

Don't forget otto, that LE only "believe" the trio to be dead based on the "preponderance of evidence" they have thus far uncovered. Therefore, it is not a fact yet, it is only their belief. So for LE to travel to Mexico 'just to make sure', by perhaps checking the condo for indications of recent inhabitation, or even to check for live or dead bodies, would be prudent on their part to cross their t's and dot their i's. Otherwise, it would be too simple for the defence at trial to say, 'but you didn't even check to see if the trio may have travelled to their condo in Mexico'. There may have been sighting reports in Mexico they were following up on, even if they felt they were false, they would have to have been followed up on in order to protect their case.

"They are dead" he said matter-of-factly.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2014/07/16/21809716.html?cid=rsshomepage

 

[otto]

E
"They are dead" he said matter-of-factly.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2014/07/16/21809716.html?cid=rsshomepage

Thanks for finding that. More from the same article:

"But as one of the few people who's actually viewed the forensic evidence tying accused triple killer Douglas Garland to the disappearance of three Calgarians, Chief Rick Hanson says he has absolutely no doubt.

"They are dead," he says, matter-of-factly.

Calgary's top cop gives absolutely no wiggle room for "maybe" or "what if" in the murder of five-year-old Nathan O'Brien and his grandparents, Alvin and Kathryn Liknes.

It's impossible to argue with someone who has all the facts: Hanson already knows what is soon to be presented before a judge and lawyers in court, and he has a one-word answer for those asking if the trio is certainly, without-any-doubt dead.

"Yes."

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2014/07/16/21809716.html?cid=rsshomepage

Police knew, without doubt, that the trio were dead on July 15 and made that announcement. They most likely knew at the time the crime scene was discovered that they were dead, but they waited for DNA evidence to confirm what they could see with their own eyes. On August 5, investigators were in Mexico to investigate a possible connection to those murders. I think it's safe to say that police were not in Mexico looking for the deceased victims three weeks after they announced that the victims were deceased.

 

[otto]

Here's the map of the planned search area on the day that the acreage was first searched (believe it was July 5). That planned search was cancelled at noon.

 

[otto]

The donor does have his own foundation too and that might be where the kick start of 40k came from.

What do you mean about having his own foundation and taking money from that foundation and moving it to the new corporation? Where does the info about another foundation come from?

 

[Lalalacasbah]

The fact that charges were laid doesn't mean the police did a good job. See Bernardo, Pickton, etc. The police did a terrible job. Charges were still laid.

Police didn't do a terrible job, Pickton and Bernardo were guilty and are now currently in prison.

Could police have done a *better* job than they did? Sure, but couldn't we all do better, be perfect and never make mistakes? The world and human nature doesn't work that way - we all make mistakes at times.

 

[otto]

Police didn't do a terrible job, Pickton and Bernardo were guilty and are now currently in prison.

Could police have done a *better* job than they did? Sure, but couldn't we all do better, be perfect and never make mistakes? The world and human nature doesn't work that way - we all make mistakes at times.

With Bernardo, police had his DNA long before he was arrested, but they were backlogged with DNA testing for the Scarborough rapist. That was a mistake. Police then made a deal with Homolka with the condition that she tell the truth. She lied, but police upheld their end of the deal anyway. With Russell Williams, police endowed him with some sort of special status when the investigation led to his doorstep. Williams pointed the finger at a neighbour and police investigated that neighbour. It was when Williams went through a check stop and his tires matched those in a field next to a crime scene that one of the officers decided that, regardless of Williams' special status, they would look into it. With Robert Pickton, police knew that he had handcuffed and assaulted a woman at his farm, but because she was a prostitute, they did nothing. Because it was prostitutes that were vanishing, police did nothing. They made huge errors. Police also made huge errors with Clifford Olsen. Because the abductions and murders were in different jurisdictions, and because police were immature and territorial about their cases, Olsen murdered eleven children before an arrest. Police then went on to make a cash for victims deal where Olsen's wife received $10,000 for each murdered child.

With Garland, police did not drop the ball. They pursued several avenues of investigation, zeroed in on video surveillance footage, discovered the old Ford truck in pristine condition, located the owner, and made an arrest as soon as possible for, what I would consider, a minor infraction: false identity documents. That was four days after the murders. They held him as long as possible ... something like eight days ... to buy themselves time to complete the DNA testing. As soon as the testing was completed, they re-arrested him and charged him with the murders. 15 days from murders to arrest reflects excellent police work.

 

[ABro]

Police didn't do a terrible job, Pickton and Bernardo were guilty and are now currently in prison.

Could police have done a *better* job than they did? Sure, but couldn't we all do better, be perfect and never make mistakes? The world and human nature doesn't work that way - we all make mistakes at times.

Sure we all make mistakes, but not all mistakes are created equal. In fact, some are even what we call criminal negligence.

I am perfectly happy to call out police when they do a terrible job as they did in the Pickton and Bernardo cases. People died because of their negligence and dereliction of duty. It wasn't because they didn't do a "better job." Many didn't do their job, period. This was established by The Commissions specially called to look into both cases.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Wow, remind me not to state my opinion on a forum where you will be attacked and be told your opinion is wrong, and that is that, period. Last time I checked, we live in a country where I'm allowed to be a free thinker.

I feel the police do their best *most* times with what they have, they don't mean to make mistakes on purpose. It's a flawed system, any large infrastructure dealing with lots people are. Just like doctors and healthcare are flawed, politicians and government are flawed, etc.

That is my opinion and I'm allowed to have that, thanks.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Sure we all make mistakes, but not all mistakes are created equal. In fact, some are even what we call criminal negligence.

I am perfectly happy to call out police when they do a terrible job as they did in the Pickton and Bernardo cases. People died because of their negligence and dereliction of duty. It wasn't because they didn't do a "better job." Many didn't do their job, period. This was established by The Commissions specially called to look into both cases.

Without someone first questioning LE's actions during those cases, before any evidence of negligence was produced, the Commissions never would have happened.

Simply because one gets across two lanes of highway without getting hit, does not automatically mean playing there is safe. There is no evidence to the contrary.... you haven't been hit... yet speculation leads you to think about it, and maybe look into the possibilities.

Won't it be awful if two years from now, we find out there was an accomplice that LE had on their radar, but mishandled the information. That won't happen unless someone takes a critical look at LE, and asks why they did this or that... much like what happens here.

Evidence of negligence doesn't just drive into you... something has to appear off, then you find it.