Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #19

[OutOfTheDarkness]

His opinion of his own ability to be trustworthy is irrelevant. What is relevant, is that he is a highly decorated officer that has a career in policing that has been above reproach. He has not committed any acts that suggest otherwise. We pay him to make these decisions. If he has made poor decisions in this regard, he shouldn't continued to hold the office of Chief.

Sorry... I believe he believes the victims are deceased. Misplaced "it".

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

BBM
That's a funny word, but not appropriate.

Per Schrodinger's Cat, they are either alive or dead. Police have evidence that they are dead. Some don't want to believe that. If we believe that they are alive, then it follows (that P>Q thing)that the grandparents kidnapped the grandchild and escaped from the box. That's plain and simple logic ... nothing more, nothing less.

Oy. What you're supposed to take from that is you don't know until you see the proof for yourself. Until that time, if someone tells you the cat is dead or alive, you still don't know for certain. This isn't difficult.

LE also says there is no other suspect. Police are staying as fact that the evidence points to DG's involvement. When those people who swear by "everything LE says is fact" are asked does no other suspects mean DG is then guilty, then they say the same thing... "I don't know. I'll have to wait to see the evidence at trial."

You can't have it both ways, and I can't explain it any simpler for those who refuse to look at themselves with a fair, and critical eye.

 

[deugirtni]

Please note that 'convinced' is not 'fact'. Thank you.

It's a fact. Police have stated that they have evidence that the family is dead.

“Until we had evidence that absolutely convinced all of us that the family was dead,” Chief Hanson said, “we were going to move the investigation based on the smallest hope.”

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...us-secrecy-over-arrest-in-nathan-obrien-case/

 

[deugirtni]

Posters need to check their facts before making statements as fact. It IS allowed in other provinces, but must be approved. Your post was NOT stated as an opinion, but as a fact, and I asked you to back it up. I am still waiting for that. No matter what the law is in Alberta vs the rest of Canada or the world, you stated as fact that 'most murderers' choose trial by judge alone, and I am waiting for you to back that statement up with proof.

I posted an opinion stating that many or most (don't remember which word I used in each of the several remarks) murderers elect to be tried by Judge alone. That was met with links to Ontario law, which of course contradicted my statements, and which is different than Alberta law. I then posted links proving the fact that there are no conditions attached to murderers electing to be tried by Judge alone in Alberta. I posted that twice because people skipped over it, preferring to believe the law of Ontario rather than the law of Alberta. So now we know that if it's advantageous to the murderer, he/she can elect to be tried by Judge alone in Alberta - it's nothing more than a simple choice. This is not allowed in other provinces ... and it's not because that option disadvantages the accused.

I know that many murderers elect to be tried by Judge alone in Calgary because I've taken a great interest in criminal justice for the last 20 years ... but don't take my word for it, take a trip to the courthouse and request transcripts.

 

[deugirtni]

I am definitely not taking your word for it, but since you stated it as a fact, the onus is on you, not me, to get the links to prove it. Just as you have many many times asked other posters for links to back up their statements. Two way street.

I posted an opinion stating that many or most (don't remember which word I used in each of the several remarks) murderers elect to be tried by Judge alone. That was met with links to Ontario law, which of course contradicted my statements, and which is different than Alberta law. I then posted links proving the fact that there are no conditions attached to murderers electing to be tried by Judge alone in Alberta. I posted that twice because people skipped over it, preferring to believe the law of Ontario rather than the law of Alberta. So now we know that if it's advantageous to the murderer, he/she can elect to be tried by Judge alone in Alberta - it's nothing more than a simple choice. This is not allowed in other provinces ... and it's not because that option disadvantages the accused.

I know that many murderers elect to be tried by Judge alone in Calgary because I've taken a great interest in criminal justice for the last 20 years ... but don't take my word for it, take a trip to the courthouse and request transcripts.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Your post just made me think of something. I must have the crappiest computer or internet (I haven't yet determined which it is, or if it is in fact both), but sometimes there is a little lag.. and I will click on my mouse, but because of the lag, it ends up clicking on something ELSE instead. It drives me WILD! I am just wondering if that is a possibility for how that happened to your friend. I NEVER click on advertisements on a webpage, but depending on the performance of my computer/internet, that has happened where I have clicked one thing, only to be lagged and it instead clicks on the ad which I never want to see.

That's happened to me too, not fun! It's possible my friend mistakenly clicked on an ad, but she's pretty tech savvy having worked in the media/film biz in Vancouver, not sure she'd do it by accident, still possible though!

If I have time today I'm going to try to see if this is a FB thing or user-end thing as it's gotten me so intrigued!

The only thing is (don't mean to be a bubble burster) if the theory is KL is accessing FB, why would she do this knowing it's being watched possibly by LE and family? Surely she would know not to do anything online?

 

[Tricia]

The best way to know how common it is for murderers to be tried by Judge alone is to attend court, or ask a criminal offence prosecutor. It is not typically something that is reported in the news. Any reporter that has covered murder trials in Calgary (and most likely other major cities in Alberta) should know not only that it is in Alberta alone that murderers can elect to be tried by Judge (no jury), but should also know that it is common.

Is there anything anywhere that states most criminals have a judge rather than a jury trial?

Please remember to include links when posting something as fact.


Thank you,
Tricia

 

[deugirtni]

Yes, surely.

That's happened to me too, not fun! It's possible my friend mistakenly clicked on an ad, but she's pretty tech savvy having worked in the media/film biz in Vancouver, not sure she'd do it by accident, still possible though!

If I have time today I'm going to try to see if this is a FB thing or user-end thing as it's gotten me so intrigued!

The only thing is (don't mean to be a bubble burster) if the theory is KL is accessing FB, why would she do this knowing it's being watched possibly by LE and family? Surely she would know not to do anything online?

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I wonder if the CCTV cameras caught the face at all? It appears to show the back of the truck.. the box.. but yet there are no bodies. At least one poster here has made statements claiming that the bodies were seen by police on camera (covered up of course by the household bedding, which of course would be easily recognizable) in the back of the truck, travelling away from the L property. I suppose anything is possible if we all keep an open mind.

I'm thinking we only saw a snippet of the footage (the still photo released) from the Parkhill neighborhood.

My thoughts are this truck was caught on other CCTV camera's along other travel routes/roads and possibly caught on video from local businesses. I'm thinking this truck was seen on a business CCTV in the East Lake Ramp area of Airdrie, as I can't see how else LE would pinpoint a particular block to search in that area unless the truck was captured on video. Just my theory and opinion.

Maybe there's a chain of truck videos they've laced together that ties everything together?

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Not quite the same as Page dates changing and being 'liked' after the fact, but here's a little info I dug up, quite interesting.

Facebook is a scary, sneaky animal, beware!

Why Are Dead People Liking Stuff On Facebook? And why does a vegetarian "like" McDonald's, while a guy who has never owned a car "likes" Subaru? The weird side of Facebook likes.

http://readwrite.com/2012/12/11/why-are-dead-people-liking-stuff-on-facebook

Why is Facebook liking pages automatically for me? How do I stop it doing this?

https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=10200260726779749

Facebook keeps "Liking" pages for me? I did Not "Like" them... Why would this happen?

https://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20131110100314AA4GEK1

 

[LoisLane]

Not quite the same as Page dates changing and being 'liked' after the fact, but here's a little info I dug up, quite interesting.

Facebook is a scary, sneaky animal, beware!

Why Are Dead People Liking Stuff On Facebook? And why does a vegetarian "like" McDonald's, while a guy who has never owned a car "likes" Subaru? The weird side of Facebook likes.

http://readwrite.com/2012/12/11/why-are-dead-people-liking-stuff-on-facebook

Why is Facebook liking pages automatically for me? How do I stop it doing this?

https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=10200260726779749

Facebook keeps "Liking" pages for me? I did Not "Like" them... Why would this happen?

https://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20131110100314AA4GEK1

Thanks Lala. The difference and weirdness to me is that the companies that can do what is described in your links above is that these are large corporations that have possibly paid top dollar to end up on peoples pages. The moving company is a private owned small-scale co. He does have a lot of likes though. The other moving co. has under 100 likes and is a small-scale co. private owned co. I just can't see them achieving the marketing talent and funds to do this (that is if you have to pay to have your co. appear on pages).

I am messaging the co., he has responded, but I need to get a few more direct answers before it makes any sense..

 

[LoisLane]

It was the RCMP, not municipal...

Besides, the mistrial was declared when a judge discovered he was not provided with two witness statements by the Crown.

Even still, if it is RCMP I wonder if there is some sort of disciplinary/investigative process to see how this all came to be in the end a mistrial.

Were the witness statements from the Crown? (was the Crown the witness?) Would the RCMP have taken the statement or the Crown took the statement? Was the Crown supplied the witness statements by RCMP, or the Crown didn't supply to the Judge because the statement taken by RCMP was inconsistent with the handling of the statement? I will definitely need to spend some time on the Vader case but if you have any insight on this I would greatly appreciate it.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I assume Crown can't just put the Chief of Police on the stand to testify that the victims are deceased and that's that.

Cody Legebokoff testified at his trial that one of the victims hit herself with a wrench, and stabbed herself in the throat. I wonder what would happen if DG claimed he was on good terms with AL, and he even loaned him his truck that week? The proof of death instantly becomes a focal point.

There are many, many ways evidence can be interpreted.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

It was the RCMP, not municipal...

Besides, the mistrial was declared when a judge discovered he was not provided with two witness statements by the Crown.

Charges were stayed. No mistrial for the murder charges. That was an unrelated matter.

Sorry Honey Muffin... flogged again.

 

[news.talk]

Charges were stayed. No mistrial for the murder charges. That was an unrelated matter.

Sorry Honey Muffin... flogged again.

Told ya I needed to read more about Vader. I will happily take the flogging sir.

This is the link that gave me the info I was referring to... it was his first trial.

http://ww2.nationalpost.com/m/wp/bl...cused-him-of-murdering-missing-alberta-couple

 

[deugirtni]

Let us hope that LE has found a chain of videos and they've been able to lace them together!!

I'm thinking we only saw a snippet of the footage (the still photo released) from the Parkhill neighborhood.

My thoughts are this truck was caught on other CCTV camera's along other travel routes/roads and possibly caught on video from local businesses. I'm thinking this truck was seen on a business CCTV in the East Lake Ramp area of Airdrie, as I can't see how else LE would pinpoint a particular block to search in that area unless the truck was captured on video. Just my theory and opinion.

Maybe there's a chain of truck videos they've laced together that ties everything together?

 

[deugirtni]

Aren't we able to also see which apps a person has on their FB? You can see everything else, so why not see those too? I wonder if those apps are on KL's FB? I find it odd that if someone does have access to KL's FB account, why haven't they made it private, ie all the posts, friends, photos, etc. That is assuming the family doesn't want to just shut it down for whatever reason.

Not quite the same as Page dates changing and being 'liked' after the fact, but here's a little info I dug up, quite interesting.

Facebook is a scary, sneaky animal, beware!

Why Are Dead People Liking Stuff On Facebook? And why does a vegetarian "like" McDonald's, while a guy who has never owned a car "likes" Subaru? The weird side of Facebook likes.

http://readwrite.com/2012/12/11/why-are-dead-people-liking-stuff-on-facebook

Why is Facebook liking pages automatically for me? How do I stop it doing this?

https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=10200260726779749

Facebook keeps "Liking" pages for me? I did Not "Like" them... Why would this happen?

https://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20131110100314AA4GEK1

 

[winnnancy]

There were 200 officers involved in this case according to news and according to your prior posts. Please provide a link wherein it states that the evidence found 'absolutely convinced everyone involved with the case that the family was dead'. I believe there were only a handful of people who made that call. Please provide proof that 'everyone involved' agreed with that determination.

And yes, the public, including ourselves, you and me, will learn the details at the trial. That is when statements may perhaps become factual, or not.

Statements and evidence ARE ALREADY factual! evidence has been collected, catalogued, and tested. Statements have been made on the basis of the evidence collectively in its entirety. The statements too are fact in their own right if not simply by the virtue that they (statements) have been made.
All of this information together will be presented at trial not to determine whether they ( evidence and statements) are legitimate( because the process of sorting data and excluding irrelevant information would now be completed) but whether all of it is sufficient to convict DG for murder and/or disposal of 3 people.

 

[winnnancy]

From the crime scene (s):

Loss of blood in the amount life cannot be sustained...

Human organ tissue...

Chemical changes in body tissue or blood recovered...

*Death is likely to result in very extensive biochemical changes in all body tissues due to lack of circulating oxygen, altered enzymatic reactions, cellular degradation, and cessation of anabolic production of metabolites.*

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0082011

Good point, I have heard that for the purpose of consumption( in Meat plants) the want a quick, unexpected slaughter because otherwise, stress hormones result in meat being tough.
I haven't read the link above but it seems to me that blood can be tested for these chemicals. I'll research this and post links as I find them...

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Statements and evidence ARE ALREADY factual! evidence has been collected, catalogued, and tested. Statements have been made on the basis of the evidence collectively in its entirety. The statements too are fact in their own right if not simply by the virtue that they (statements) have been made.
All of this information together will be presented at trial not to determine whether they ( evidence and statements) are legitimate( because the process of sorting data and excluding irrelevant information would now be completed) but whether all of it is sufficient to convict DG for murder and/or disposal of 3 people.

Refer to the 'statement' LE made about there being no other suspects in the murder of the victims. Statement does not equal fact. If statement were fact, then DG is the only one who could have done it. No need for trial.

If the defence made a 'statement' that based on the entirety of the evidence, his client will be exonerated... is that a fact, or an interpretation of the evidence contradicting LE's interpretation of the evidence?

The trial is exactly that. A presentation of the facts, and the differing interpretations of them. The judge or jury then decide which interpretation they believe.