The Garland property that was searched as part of the investigation is owned by the parents of the accused. Normally, depending on what is done with the estate property (eg: sell or change title), everything is divided equally. I'm basing Airdrie acreage value on current acreage sales for city lot development, as well as for 4 acre parcel development. Depending on the intended land use, the property value fluctuates between $4-8 million ... higher density, higher value; closer to Airdrie, higher value; annexed by Airdrie, very high value ... up to $8 million.
BBM. Douglas strikes me as the sullen, sneaky type rather than the head on approach of talking his grudge over with Alvin and Kathryn Liknes. If Allen knew about the grudge, then Alvin knew about the grudge ... that is, I think that Douglas Garland told Alvin Liknes that he was unhappy, and either Liknes or Garland told Allen that Douglas Garland was upset about the patent design name omission. I don't think that Douglas Garland had any reason to be confrontational with Alvin's son regarding the patent design recognition grudge (although maybe that conversation was at Thanksgiving Dinner 7 years ago). I do think that Douglas Garland confronted Alvin about the patent design recognition omission.
It's possible that Douglas Garland held a grudge from the time of the patent design payment problem. If he thought that his family money, intended for his sisters and their children, would be used for the Mazatlan retirement of the Liknes couple, then he could have been really angry to learn that not only was the money used by his sister to purchase an interest in the Mexico property, but the title was in the name of a company owned by Alvin and his twin brother Allen ... because two foreigners in a company can purchase property in Mexico. One person cannot purchase property in Mexico. The minute the money was in the names of the twins, if that happened, it was lost to the Garlands. Would it surprise anyone to learn that the Liknes couple had taken money from unsuspecting investors ... and then declared bankruptcy? The property purchase clearly happened prior to the bankruptcy declaration ... was money used to invest in a bankrupt company? What happened financially ... and what about the monkey business with the caveat on the property. Caveats usually relate to height restrictions and only effect the company insofar as restricting the building opens for the next owner. Why was the property mortgaged for more than the actual value. That usually requires some sort of monkey business with banks.
Regardless of whether the condo in Mazatlan was a good purchase, if the money came from the sister of the accused (which is the only thing that makes sense), then her money vanished from the paper trail the minute Alvin and Kathryn put it into a Mexico condo in some company name owned by twins Allen and Alvin Liknes. That could be a problem when there is a prior history of financial losses between Douglas Garland and Alvin Liknes.
If Allen Liknes worked hard to save money above and beyond the needs of his family, while riding the backroads on his motorcycle, and he invested thousands of dollars in a condo for his father and his father's wife, then that's great. It's just that he doesn't strike me as the type to have looked after all family needs and have that extra to give to his parents. Somehow, per the news, the Garland name included on the title of the property suggests to me that the sister's money was used.
It's also highly unlikely that the Liknes couple could purchase the property without a company of at least two. With a company, established by Allen Liknes, who has been in Mazatlan for some time, Alvin as the employee, it would be no problem to buy a condo ... but the Garland name would be lost either in the paperwork, or perhaps the bankruptcy.
That is, if we eliminate the use of money from Garland's sister, and the absence of security in that investment, then the entire theory falls apart. That's why one of the premises for the theory is that the Garland family is prosperous, the children could borrow money, that money was tied to the condo, and there was no paper trail for the sister/family (in the event of the sister's untimely death) to recoup the investment on paper.