Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #20

[news.talk]

^^
When does the publication ban go into effect? Is the application processed before the preliminary hearing? Does this case fit the criteria?

A publication ban usually only affects pre-trials. I suspect media outlets will file for an ITO - An Information To Obtain document prior to the prelim. The document allows the unsealing of records in the disclosure that was used to obtain a search warrant for the acreage. I suspect that information would contain the forensic findings from the Parkhill crime scene, CCTV footage and possible witness statements.

In the Brentwood murders, the ITO request went before a judge on November 26th and the Judge reserved his ruling until March of next year. The victim's families asked that it not be granted as the public's right to know does not supersede their rights to have then most graphic details of the crime exposed before trial when it is necessary. They see it as sensationalistic and unnecessary to the quest for justice. Of course the media has a very different view point, that I laid out above.

It is really hit or miss depending on the judge as to whether an ITO will be granted in this case. I imagine that there will be similar objections from the families and the Crown.

 

[LoisLane]

This article points out that if the defence requests a publication ban that it is mandatory. Is that true?

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/12/0...in-court-hearing-to-see-if-theyll-stand-trial

"At the request of defence lawyers Jim Lutz and Dennis Kolba, Skene imposed a publication ban on the evidence she will hear during the preliminary inquiry.

Such bans are mandatory if sought by the defence."

 

[deugirtni]

Or... 3 murdered. In Airdrie. Or... 2 murdered in Parkhill neighbourhood and 1 murdered, in another neighbourhood.. Or.. why not just have it be correct? What's to hide? What's the prob with fixing? Why not get it right? Or is there a reason why it's contradictory? Or not? Frankly, I don't believe that CPS would leave it up there for 6 months with errors (frankly, because I do NOT think they are incompetent).. and so.. that brings out my antennas to think that something ELSE is up, as opposed to just writing it off to doesn't matter, not accurate, can't rely on it, no biggie.

Yes... but to put it in proper perspective, even if it were 100% correct to the best of LE's current knowledge, it probably still wouldn't offer anything new. 3 murdered. In Calgary.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Or... 3 murdered. In Airdrie. Or... 2 murdered in Parkhill neighbourhood and 1 murdered, in another neighbourhood.. Or.. why not just have it be correct? What's to hide? What's the prob with fixing? Why not get it right? Or is there a reason why it's contradictory? Or not? Frankly, I don't believe that CPS would leave it up there for 6 months with errors (frankly, because I do NOT think they are incompetent).. and so.. that brings out my antennas to think that something ELSE is up, as opposed to just writing it off to doesn't matter, not accurate, can't rely on it, no biggie.

I understand your point... but...

Hypothetically, if one of the victims were strangled, it's likely there wasn't enough left behind to prove the victim died there. Body is gone. No other murder scene found yet. What neighborhood do you list the murder in?

Perhaps the reports are as accurate as possible.

 

[Slebby]

I understand your point... but...

Hypothetically, if one of the victims were strangled, it's likely there wasn't enough left behind to prove the victim died there. Body is gone. No other murder scene found yet. What neighborhood do you list the murder in?

Perhaps the reports are as accurate as possible.

I completely agree.
Or what if, say, a victim is mortally wounded at the Parkhill home, blood loss is evident, but maybe not enough to state conclusively that death has occurred THERE. The killer wraps them up in sheets and quilts and moves the body. Later, LE finds the blood-soaked bedding. Did the victim die at the Parkhill home or elsewhere? IF LE cannot say for certain, does the death show up in the stats for Parkhill?

Finally, I have to say, I still don't understand why this inconsequential stat on an obscure website is such a sticking point for some folks. Can you not chalk it up to "it will all come clear in due time"? The police chief said they're dead. Is that in doubt?

Imo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I completely agree.
What if, say, a victim is mortally wounded at the Parkhill home, blood loss is evident, but maybe not enough to state conclusively that death has occurred THERE. The killer wraps them up in sheets and quilts and moves the body. Later, LE finds the blood-soaked bedding. Did the victim die at the Parkhill home or elsewhere? IF LE cannot say for certain, does the death show up in the stats for Parkhill?

Finally, I have to say, I still don't understand why this inconsequential stat on an obscure website is such a sticking point for some folks. Can you not chalk it up to "it will all come clear in due time"? The police chief said they're dead. Is that in doubt?

Imo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think people's frustrations are stemming, in part, from the lack of an explanation from LE. Unfortunately, they probably aren't allowed to divulge whether they know where the murders took place, or if one or more are unknown.

It's not a bad thing to hold government, courts, LE, and all other publicly funded institutions accountable for how they spend money, and how they keep track of their activities. Although the reasons for the report issues are probably innocuous, having a critical look at the process is healthy, and may help improve reporting in the future. I don't see anything sinister personally, but nor would I discourage those who want to look into it.

 

[deugirtni]

But if that were the case, then how would they state that all 3 are dead with conviction? If there is no sign of one (or more) of their deaths, enough to believe that death occurred, how can we have members stating the coroner declared them dead based on DNA? Can we have the ME declare one or two dead and then just assume the third? But yet we have arguing going on here that 'it is a fact'. And in the PDF document, it doesn't list neighbourhoods. So why are 3 homicides missing from THAT report wherein they don't have to worry about fitting 3 murders into a specific location. To me, we can't have our cake and eat it too, so to speak.

I understand your point... but...

Hypothetically, if one of the victims were strangled, it's likely there wasn't enough left behind to prove the victim died there. Body is gone. No other murder scene found yet. What neighborhood do you list the murder in?

Perhaps the reports are as accurate as possible.

 

[deugirtni]

For me, yes that is in doubt. If there were some detail that came across in the opposite light, ie somehow indicating something positive for the people who state it is fact, and we on the other end, who know it is not yet fact, suggest that it is an inconsequential stat on an obscure website, you can imagine the backlash? Apparently LE has lsited 2 homicides in Parkhill in June 2014, yet another report says zero homicides in Parkhill in June 2014, and another says there were only x number of homicides in the entire city of Calgary during the entire month of June, but that number does not include the L family trio. Why is this inconsequential?

I completely agree.
Or what if, say, a victim is mortally wounded at the Parkhill home, blood loss is evident, but maybe not enough to state conclusively that death has occurred THERE. The killer wraps them up in sheets and quilts and moves the body. Later, LE finds the blood-soaked bedding. Did the victim die at the Parkhill home or elsewhere? IF LE cannot say for certain, does the death show up in the stats for Parkhill?

Finally, I have to say, I still don't understand why this inconsequential stat on an obscure website is such a sticking point for some folks. Can you not chalk it up to "it will all come clear in due time"? The police chief said they're dead. Is that in doubt?

Imo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

But if that were the case, then how would they state that all 3 are dead with conviction? If there is no sign of one (or more) of their deaths, enough to believe that death occurred, how can we have members stating the coroner declared them dead based on DNA? Can we have the ME declare one or two dead and then just assume the third? But yet we have arguing going on here that 'it is a fact'. And in the PDF document, it doesn't list neighbourhoods. So why are 3 homicides missing from THAT report wherein they don't have to worry about fitting 3 murders into a specific location. To me, we can't have our cake and eat it too, so to speak.

Again, back to the hypothetical... what if they found a bone from the strangled victim in the slough? Proof of death... no proof of location of where it happened.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

For me, yes that is in doubt. If there were some detail that came across in the opposite light, ie somehow indicating something positive for the people who state it is fact, and we on the other end, who know it is not yet fact, suggest that it is an inconsequential stat on an obscure website, you can imagine the backlash? Apparently LE has lsited 2 homicides in Parkhill in June 2014, yet another report says zero homicides in Parkhill in June 2014, and another says there were only x number of homicides in the entire city of Calgary during the entire month of June, but that number does not include the L family trio. Why is this inconsequential?

What if the stats are kept according to the date of the declaration of death? What if there was a death certificate issued, and it's signed and dated in July?

 

[deugirtni]

But why not put the death in the pdf report which counts the murders then? Like I said, it has no neighbourhood stats in that one.

Again, back to the hypothetical... what if they found a bone from the strangled victim in the slough? Proof of death... no proof of location of where it happened.

 

[deugirtni]

Because they're missing frmo July's report as well, first of all, and second of all, the report tells you that the pdf report is dynamic and they change it according to new information.

What if the stats are kept according to the date of the declaration of death? What if there was a death certificate issued, and it's signed and dated in July?

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Because they're missing frmo July's report as well, first of all, and second of all, the report tells you that the pdf report is dynamic and they change it according to new information.

Again... Perhaps now that charges are before the courts, they can't release anything evidence related, or are erring on the side of caution to preserve the integrity of the case. The resonable explanations outnumber the unlikely ones. If the homicide total number is correct, then the finer details probably have to wait for trial, or some other resolution.

 

[deugirtni]

That is really a reach isn't it? We are talking about regular monthly reports which are produced by them every month. I'm sure plenty of any given month's homicides are before the courts at any given time, with a suspected murderer having been charged. I'm sure there are other times when a homicide may not be deemed to be a homicide until a later month. They still release their stats. Why would it be a secret that homicides occurred? Many suspected murderers are in jail waiting on their day in court, this is no secret. Stats are stats. Evidence is evidence.

Again... Perhaps now that charges are before the courts, they can't release anything evidence related, or are erring on the side of caution to preserve the integrity of the case. The resonable explanations outnumber the unlikely ones. If the homicide total number is correct, then the finer details probably have to wait for trial, or some other resolution.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

That is really a reach isn't it? We are talking about regular monthly reports which are produced by them every month. I'm sure plenty of any given month's homicides are before the courts at any given time, with a suspected murderer having been charged. I'm sure there are other times when a homicide may not be deemed to be a homicide until a later month. They still release their stats. Why would it be a secret that homicides occurred? Many suspected murderers are in jail waiting on their day in court, this is no secret. Stats are stats. Evidence is evidence.

Again... hypothetically, if they syuspect a murder allegedly occurred at the acreage... can they release that information? It will be part of any trial, and possibly challenged. It could taint a jury pool... no?

 

[deugirtni]

If they didn't have 'proof' that the trio died in Calgary, then how could the 3 homicides be included in the Calgary year-to-date totals? If Airdrie was suspected, then it wouldn't be Calgary's stats, would it?

Again... hypothetically, if they syuspect a murder allegedly occurred at the acreage... can they release that information? It will be part of any trial, and possibly challenged. It could taint a jury pool... no?

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

If they didn't have 'proof' that the trio died in Calgary, then how could the 3 homicides be included in the Calgary year-to-date totals? If Airdrie was suspected, then it wouldn't be Calgary's stats, would it?

... and as we approach full circle...

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Hi everyone, off topic, but I might head over to this thread to try to sleuth if anyone wants to join.

Eerily reminds me of NO…a little 3 year old boy missing from Australia named William Tyrell, literally just disappeared from the back yard within 1-5 minutes while his grandmother was in the back yard drinking tea. Very puzzling and sad.

ETA - Here's his Facebook page also called Bring Little Spiderman William Tyrell Home (BBM)
https://www.facebook.com/WilliamTyrellbringbackhome

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...NSW-12th-Sept-2014-3&highlight=william+tyrell

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...109042952?nk=14ae3a7e42c1442b80b6dc9d4f4a0de8

 

[deugirtni]

OT, but I had always had in my head that it was *worse* to be found NCR, as opposed to ''guilty'.. I thought that instead of a convict spending a determined amount of time in a prison, the NCR would be at the mercy of his institution and therefore *never* see the light of day, well at least the light of day anywhere other than at whichever institution one resided in. What kind of institution would ever let someone out who had been deemed to be so mentally ill that they either couldn't stand trial or couldn't be found responsible?

But I guess I thought wrong! I am shocked to read this story about a man who was let out on a MONDAY and failed to return 2 days later, on the WEDNESDAY! So I guess it's okay for these NCR's to get day passes, or two-day passes, to just roam amongst us and everything is fine unless they fail to return? And then suddenly if they don't return, they figure out, hey, this guy 'may present a serious safety risk'?

It seems the police and media are not stating what this man did to get himself locked up, so I suppose with NCR, there are privacy rights involved, as opposed to being found 'guilty', where the world gets to know. Please note this is in Toronto and not in Calgary, but one might take a leap to suggest that our provincial review boards within Canada may act similarly. I also suppose that I shouldn't jump to conclusions in thinking perhaps he committed some heinous crime, perhaps he only stole a chocolate bar or something.

In any case, maybe not such a bad idea afterall to claim NCR!

Missing man "may present a serious safety risk": police
....

Toronto police are looking for a man in violation of an Ontario Review Board Disposition Order and warning the public that he may present a serious safety risk.

....

The Ontario Review Board has jurisdiction over people who have been deemed either unfit to stand trial or not criminally responsible due to mental illness.

“Police are concerned for the safety of the public,” said a statement released on Thursday night. “If he is located, do not approach him, call 911.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/12/04/missing_man_may_present_a_serious_safety_risk_police.htmlhttp://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...may_present_a_serious_safety_risk_police.html

 

[LoisLane]

Here is a current breaking story in Calgary. So many questions about the children and their welfare thru this whole mess.

I am not familiar with this case but I do not think the victim's body was recovered. However details released state that remains were recently found in the home where the accused and the two children were residing. How awful. The children are in my thoughts and I hope they are in the proper care and have full access to the resources and support they will need to live and adapt to a healthy life. Absolutely heart breaking.

Notice the perp walk and released details from LE.
http://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/police-investigation-underway-at-ogden-home

"Hebert said investigators discovered what’s believed to be human remains within the house. Members with the forensic crime scene unit continued to search the home Saturday."

"When asked how it was possible for three people to live in a home containing what’s believed to be human remains, Hebert said: “There are some circumstances within the house that it will be revealed during the court process that will answer that question.”"