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

[otto]

As long as a death certificate has been issued, the process is the same.

I would think that presenting the medical examiner with a dead body, or crucial parts of a dead body, would be sufficient for a death certificate.

 

[otto]

I don't understand your point here. You are getting your dates wrong somehow. If it is important to your arguments you may need to confirm the dates with links.

Also, NO attended his parents wedding in 2009.

Nathan was five years old, and his parents were married in 2009. Kathryn was born in 1961 and completed most of a print making diploma at SAIT when she met Alvin Liknes - a man 13 year her senior with four children. Alvin and Kathryn either got married and had one son, or they did the same thing as Nathan's parents.

When did they get married, and how long after the marriage did they have a son. This is relevant in terms of understanding whether there was any possibility that the son could reasonably have been expected to be home on the night of the murders. It has been suggested in these discussions that the son returned in the middle of the long weekend to put camping equipment in the garage, which is entirely based on hypotheticals ... but does the hypothetical include that the 22-29 year old man was still living with his parents? If he was 29, why was he living with his parents. For that matter, if he was 22 and had completed a university degree, why would he be living with his parents?

What was the rumour with secret links that couldn't be divulged about a girlfriend living across the street? Are we talking about a 27 year old man living with his parents dating a girl after her parents purchased a property for her across the street from a 27-28 year old living with his parents ... or was he 22 and living independently ... and the rumours about the woman across the street are baseless?

 

[news.talk]

Nathan was five years old, and his parents were married in 2009. Kathryn was born in 1961 and completed most of a print making diploma at SAIT when she met Alvin Liknes - a man 13 year her senior with four children. Alvin and Kathryn either got married and had one son, or they did the same thing as Nathan's parents.

When did they get married, and how long after the marriage did they have a son. This is relevant in terms of understanding whether there was any possibility that the son could reasonably have been expected to be home on the night of the murders. It has been suggested in these discussions that the son returned in the middle of the long weekend to put camping equipment in the garage, which is entirely based on hypotheticals ... but does the hypothetical include that the 22-29 year old man was still living with his parents? If he was 29, why was he living with his parents. For that matter, if he was 22 and had completed a university degree, why would he be living with his parents?

What was the rumour with secret links that couldn't be divulged about a girlfriend living across the street? Are we talking about a 27 year old man living with his parents dating a girl after her parents purchased a property for her across the street from a 27-28 year old living with his parents ... or was he 22 and living independently ... and the rumours about the woman across the street are baseless?

Since at home adult-children seems to be perplexing you, please consider this...

The average student has tens of thousands of dollars in student loans to pay off once graduated. Add to that the 0.1% vacancy rate in Calgary and increasingly higher rental prices, the idea that one needs to return to the nest is born more out of necessity than anything else.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I would think that presenting the medical examiner with a dead body, or crucial parts of a dead body, would be sufficient for a death certificate.

The bonus side trip on this road is that we argued over whether LE found "no trace" of the victims. Remember that one?

 

[stan laurel]

If he was 29, why was he living with his parents. For that matter, if he was 22 and had completed a university degree, why would he be living with his parents?

What was the rumour with secret links that couldn't be divulged about a girlfriend living across the street? Are we talking about a 27 year old man living with his parents dating a girl after her parents purchased a property for her across the street from a 27-28 year old living with his parents ... or was he 22 and living independently ... and the rumours about the woman across the street are baseless?

according to rp his sister and al have been married 25 years.

as for children living at home beyond age 22, this is now a common occurrence and many msm reports can be found on this. in cowtown, it is quite expensive to live especially after going to uni, also vacancy rates aren't that great either.

and once again, if you go sleuthing you can find out about the house across the street, likely how the two met.

being a longer than long, long weekend, I'm sure jl and js were knee deep in good ol Canadian fun (I.e., beer, beer and beer).

oh! before I forget. people do make babies whether a ring is on or not (wedding ring or other).

 

[stan laurel]

The bonus side trip on this road is that we argued over whether LE found "no trace" of the victims. Remember that one?

try more lube.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

try more lube.

No, I used a "wrong" word that I subsequently deleted.

 

[stan laurel]

No, I used a "wrong" word that I subsequently deleted.

yeah but now if you read it in the voice of Mario from donkey kong....




... just read it in a falsetto voce, you'll see what'a mean.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

As long as a death certificate has been issued, the process is the same.

Is it?

Regardless, not only are you wrecking it, but we have to get into what the burden of proof is for a court, or an ME to declare someone dead. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt, or a balance of probability... and what evidence would the investigation by the ME and their investigators be allowed to consider when declaring that death? Is it strictly science, or is circumstantial evidence allowed?

The beauty of the Oxford Group's argument is that for "if P, then Q (LE is incompetent)" then every instance must be true. I only need prove one plausible theory for that absolution to be proven false. I could go for the obvious one, where LE wouldn't be incompetent for relying on the ME for information, but that's splitting hairs.

The Chief of Police declaring the victims dead because of a "preponderance of evidence" isn't incompetence, nor can it be considered a fact. It's an opinion... a judgement. The ME wouldn't be incompetent for believing a balance of probability, nor would an expert witness for the defence be incompetent for refuting the ME's opinion. Since we don't know the actual facts, those being what the declaration of death is based upon, then it is reckless to be accusing others of saying LE is incompetent, based only on an assumption.

Is it plausible the defence team will refute the declaration of death for one of the victims, based on the evidence and not incompetence?

 

[news.talk]

Is it?

Regardless, not only are you wrecking it, but we have to get into what the burden of proof is for a court, or an ME to declare someone dead. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt, or a balance of probability... and what evidence would the investigation by the ME and their investigators be allowed to consider when declaring that death? Is it strictly science, or is circumstantial evidence allowed?

The beauty of the Oxford Group's argument is that for "if P, then Q (LE is incompetent)" then every instance must be true. I only need prove one plausible theory for that absolution to be proven false. I could go for the obvious one, where LE wouldn't be incompetent for relying on the ME for information, but that's splitting hairs.

The Chief of Police declaring the victims dead because of a "preponderance of evidence" isn't incompetence, nor can it be considered a fact. It's an opinion... a judgement. The ME wouldn't be incompetent for believing a balance of probability, nor would an expert witness for the defence be incompetent for refuting the ME's opinion. Since we don't know the actual facts, those being what the actual declaration of death is based upon, then it is reckless to be accusing others of saying LE is incompetent, based only on an assumption.

Is it plausible the defence team will refute the declaration of death for one of the victims, based on the evidence and not incompetence?

Given that it was the Medical Examiner that guided the investigators on the conclusion of death, the end result does not require a preponderance of evidence, but rather definitive proof that death occurred.

In order to have someone declared legally dead in absentia without the ME's ruling, an “interested person” may make an application to the Court. The Court may make an order declaring that an individual has died if the Court is satisfied that the person has disappeared in “circumstances of peril” or has been absent for at least seven years.*

I would argue that the ruling was not necessarily death in absentia, as the declaration did not require a seperate ruling by the court. It is my belief, that there must have been *something* substantial such as human organ tissue for the ME to make the declaration of death. Like I said, they would not have been able to move forward with homicide charges, as the court would have had to had a seperate ruling without the death certificate.

You know, it would be really nice if at least one of our late night dates included something other than death and human tissue. [emoji8]

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Given that it was the Medical Examiner that guided the investigators on the conclusion of death, the end result does not require a preponderance of evidence, but rather definitive proof that death occurred.

In order to have someone declared legally dead in absentia without the ME's ruling, an “interested person” may make an application to the Court. The Court may make an order declaring that an individual has died if the Court is satisfied that the person has disappeared in “circumstances of peril” or has been absent for at least seven years.*

I would argue that the ruling was not necessarily death in absentia, as the declaration did not require a seperate ruling by the court. It is my belief, that there must have been *something* substantial such as human organ tissue for the ME to make the declaration of death. Like I said, they would not have been able to move forward with homicide charges, as the court would have had to had a seperate ruling without the death certificate.

You know, it would be really nice if at least one of our late night dates included something other than death and human tissue. [emoji8]

Shall we debate the human tissue part?

You are *assuming something* by the way, and you didn't answer my final question... Is it plausible the defence team will refute the ME's opinion?

 

[news.talk]

Shall we debate the human tissue part?

Yes... you are *assuming something* by the way, and you didn't answer my final question... Is it plausible the defence team will refute the ME's opinion?

Let's not... Just an example of one of the possible findings.

While it is possible that the Defense contests the findings, I believe that it is not probable. I would surmise that if the Defense was going to contend the ME's ruling, they would have already made a motion for a seperate ruling by the judge. That would be one of the quickest methods of defense in this type of case, as it voids the Crown's charges upfront. The fact that there has been appearances and no such request tells me that they won't be arguing whether death took place, but rather the evidence that suggests the suspect committed these crimes. JMO.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Let's not... Just an example of one of the possible findings.

While it is possible, I contend that it is not probable. I would surmise that if the Defense was going to contend the ME's ruling, they would have already made a motion for a seperate ruling by the judge. That would be one of the quickest methods of defense in this type of case, as it voids the Crown's charges upfront. The fact that there has been appearances and no such request tells me that they won't be arguing whether death took place, but rather the evidence that suggests the suspect committed these crimes. JMO.

(BBYoursecretadmirer)

Without having to go into the specific evidentiary details, you just agreed there is a chance, however slight, the ME's opinion could be challenged, thus leaving a plausible possibility... for you know... if not D, then A?

Without the facts, one cannot state the 'backward absolutions' offered as proof of slandering LE. Those claiming to have the facts, simply don't. Those asking if there is a possibility they are alive, are asking because they don't have those facts either. As well, no one can be considered automatically incompetent even if the evidence were judged to be insufficient to prove death. The black and white Oxford version of the world isn't the real world.

The court appearances were pre-discovery... and KR would also need time to consult experts before presenting that motion. Since there are multiple victims, all with an assumed differing level of evidentiary proof of death, the preliminary hearing would probably be the best place to sort through that. I assume any motion would be set over to the preliminary hearing anyway.

Do you still want to agree with those who think life is "if not B, then W"?

 

[2Hope4]

Are there any searchers still going on??? Gosh winter is coming up so soon, and the snow will fall! They need to be found before then!! Someone must know places he was familiar with, and might would have put them. While yes we know he had more than a few hours to murder then move and hide the bodies, HE didn't know that! That's one thing we sometimes forget. A murderer has no way of knowing when the person will be noticed as missing, when police will get involved, and if they left behind anything to link to them. Thus in most cases, we don't see an elaborate plan for hiding the bodies. Usually shallow graves in their known areas, water, or just leaving out in the open on the side of the road, or a field, etc. This family needs to be found, and wish it would happen soon!!!

 

[Slebby]

W

So Jen is 34 years old, her brother is 5-6 years younger, at 26-27 years of age? The suggestions that this 26-27 year old was returning in the middle of a long weekend at the end of June to store camping equipment or drag a garbage can around the front yard, and be absent during the murders, seems strange on many levels. I had assumed that he was 22 years old, and that the bartending gig was temporary. At 27, the supposed engineer that is bartending is not really an engineer ... perhaps didn't graduate.

Was he still living at home at that age?

Hi Otto.
This is not strange to me at all. I have young adult children. Even though they are pretty independent, there are times they come back home - in between moves, in between university semesters, in between co-op placements. Even with their own residences, they do not have the space to store all their belongings accumulated over their lifetime - so good old mom and dad have a lot of their stuff in the basement or even in their old bedrooms. I see this with a lot of my friends my age - their grown kids come back and forth a bit in early adulthood.

Camping gear - we have all the camping gear at our home. Our dedicated camper comes home and uses it, then brings it back after. It is much easier than trying to find room to store it all your basic apartment or home shared with roommates.

Just wanted to say - I wouldn't get too hung up on the son still being around the family home.

IMHO

 

[Slebby]

Even reading this makes me very squeamish. Do we really need a timeline of events in each of the victims' family members, and to pin down the exact age of the victims' offspring? Next, are we going to calculate the day JO was conceived? I'm really struggling to find a good reason for this invasion of the family's privacy.

I feel this way with a lot of things posted here. Some comments delve into the lives of the family, friends, or business associates in a way that seems unrelated to the crime itself, and is really more "snooping" than "sleuthing". I think it's an important distinction and something to be honest with ourselves about, IMO. Does the finding and posting of these facts serve a purpose, such as building a foundation for a theory of the crime, or is it simply snooping?

IMHO

 

[Slebby]

Nathan was five years old, and his parents were married in 2009. Kathryn was born in 1961 and completed most of a print making diploma at SAIT when she met Alvin Liknes - a man 13 year her senior with four children. Alvin and Kathryn either got married and had one son, or they did the same thing as Nathan's parents.

When did they get married, and how long after the marriage did they have a son. This is relevant in terms of understanding whether there was any possibility that the son could reasonably have been expected to be home on the night of the murders. It has been suggested in these discussions that the son returned in the middle of the long weekend to put camping equipment in the garage, which is entirely based on hypotheticals ... but does the hypothetical include that the 22-29 year old man was still living with his parents? If he was 29, why was he living with his parents. For that matter, if he was 22 and had completed a university degree, why would he be living with his parents?

What was the rumour with secret links that couldn't be divulged about a girlfriend living across the street? Are we talking about a 27 year old man living with his parents dating a girl after her parents purchased a property for her across the street from a 27-28 year old living with his parents ... or was he 22 and living independently ... and the rumours about the woman across the street are baseless?

I believe it is possible for the young adult son to occasionally reside with his parents without that fact every becoming known to DG. Why would DG know?

IMHO

 

[Slebby]

Are there any searchers still going on??? Gosh winter is coming up so soon, and the snow will fall! They need to be found before then!! Someone must know places he was familiar with, and might would have put them. While yes we know he had more than a few hours to murder then move and hide the bodies, HE didn't know that! That's one thing we sometimes forget. A murderer has no way of knowing when the person will be noticed as missing, when police will get involved, and if they left behind anything to link to them. Thus in most cases, we don't see an elaborate plan for hiding the bodies. Usually shallow graves in their known areas, water, or just leaving out in the open on the side of the road, or a field, etc. This family needs to be found, and wish it would happen soon!!!

2Hope4 - winter is here. We are blanketed in snow. It snowed a lot over the weekend and will do so on and off for another day or two.

As for your comment "While yes we know he had more than a few hours to murder then move and hide the bodies, HE didn't know that!" - I totally agree! I don't necessarily think he had an elaborate plan for hiding the bodies either. I think there is a good possibility that he simply dumped them somewhere relatively remote. I have driven the rural roads around Calgary and Airdrie, and if I wanted to, I could easily pull over, dig a hole and dump a body. Or simply drag a body 20 feet into the bushes along the road and leave them there. I invite anyone who lives in the Calgary area to drive out on those roads, wind your way into a remote road, and just park. See how long it takes for someone to come along.

(Graphic comments..)
Sure, scavenging animals could get to the remains but so what? Unless remains have been carried onto someone's property and discovered by the owners, they may never be found. Or it may take years for them to be found. IMO, property owners do not walk every acre, checking on the property. A lot of it is bush.

That the bodies haven't been found might be more a result of luck on the part of the killer than due to some cleverly plotted disposal method.

IMO

 

[deugirtni]

Nobody said there IS an ME finding or declaration of death. All that was said is that 'police believe', based on the preponderance of evidence which they have pieced together into what they feel is a 'whole' picture, which they say is enough to believe the trio are dead and the murderer is DG.

It is rare for a murder trial to have no bodies, but that is an extra burden of proof that LE/prosecution will have to prove in order for DG to be convicted by a jury. I believe that death certificates are public, are you able to provide one to say they exist for the three?

In the tragic case of Ontario's Tim Bosma, he remains were unidentifiable, and I am not certain there was any ability to extract any DNA from those remains, but even so, those remains were handed over to the family for proper burial. If there were enough 'remains' to prove death and allow an ME to make a declaration of death, those 'remains' also would have been handed over to the L/O families. But they weren't. Because they don't exist. And if an ME had made such a declaration, the Chief would have instead stated, 'the trio are dead based on the ME report'. It is that simple. But that was not done. The fact that the Chief, after making his well written statement of 'belief', then responded to a media's question, by stating 'they are dead', is still only his opinion. LE's opinion, perhaps also obviously the Crown's opinion, but still not deemed enough evidence to proceed to trial, that will be determined next spring, I believe. When that happens, assuming the charges against DG can proceed to trial, DG will be given his 'day in court' (which will of course actually be months, undoubtedly). It will then be the burden of the prosecution to prove to the jury beyond reasonable doubt, that not only is the trio dead, but also that DG is guilty. These things are simply not fact until then.

It IS possible to charge someone with a homicide without a death certificate.

.... Forensic investigators analyzing suspected homicides must trust that a dead body tells a story. When it comes to the Calgary slayings of five-year-old Nathan O'Brien and his grandparents, constructing that murder narrative to go to trial could be more challenging without any human remains.

"The bodies of the three victims have not been found," Calgary Police Chief Rick Hanson announced Monday, one day before police nevertheless brought three counts of murder against 56-year-old Douglas Garland.

Though such cases are unusual, the absence of victims' bodies does not preclude a murder charge in Canada. A prosecution can still build a solid case, retired Toronto homicide detective Dave Perry said.

....

"It's not really about not having a body; it's about how much evidence do they have without a body," he said.

.... Perry noted that convicted killers Michael Rafferty and Terri-Lynne McClintic, currently serving life sentences for murdering eight-year-old Tori Stafford, were arrested and charged in May 2009 — two months before the Ontario girl's remains were found and confirmed as being hers.

A Calgary judge in 1987 found Al Dolejs guilty of two counts of second-degree murder for killing his 12-year-old son Paul and 10-year-old daughter Gabi. Their bodies were not located until months after Dolejs was sentenced to life. He eventually brokered a prison transfer deal to lead investigators to his children's remains near Bragg Creek, and died in prison in 2005.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/nathan-o-brien-case-how-murder-of-boy-grandparents-could-be-prosecuted-without-bodies-1.2706996

Let's not... Just an example of one of the possible findings.

While it is possible that the Defense contests the findings, I believe that it is not probable. I would surmise that if the Defense was going to contend the ME's ruling, they would have already made a motion for a seperate ruling by the judge. That would be one of the quickest methods of defense in this type of case, as it voids the Crown's charges upfront. The fact that there has been appearances and no such request tells me that they won't be arguing whether death took place, but rather the evidence that suggests the suspect committed these crimes. JMO.

 

[otto]

Since at home adult-children seems to be perplexing you, please consider this...

The average student has tens of thousands of dollars in student loans to pay off once graduated. Add to that the 0.1% vacancy rate in Calgary and increasingly higher rental prices, the idea that one needs to return to the nest is born more out of necessity than anything else.

Yes, 27 year old adults that are still being supported by mom and dad perplex me. In my humble opinion, something went wrong when a 27 year old hasn't yet decided to live independently. That said, we don't know the age of this son, or whether he was living with his parents. It would be a big risk for the accused to break into a house where there were three adults in different parts of the house.