Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 June 2014 - #4

oushkaboo said:

When asked about how the rest of the family are coping:

Click to expand...

Yes. That stood out to me, too.

Well at least we know they have taken things away and are doing forensic on them. Whether or not they are relevant is another thing but, they are finding things in the fields/home that they are testing.

peony27 said:

Well at least we know they have taken things away and are doing forensic on them. Whether or not they are relevant is another thing but, they are finding things in the fields/home that they are testing.

Click to expand...

And the truck they seized.

Parole Record for DG....some interesting facts there about previous charges dropped or stayed.....
http://globalnews.ca/news/1439359/p...ut-person-of-interest-in-missing-family-case/

http://globalnews.ca/news/1438148/missing-family-search-of-rural-home-enters-fourth-day/

This is video of a reporter telling that he spoke with AL (AL's son) and he shares what AL told him.

I transcribed part of it:
We spoke to Allen Liknes who is the son of the missing Alvin Liknes. He is married to Garland's sister, and so he told us today on the phone that he was surprised the family was to see Garland's ... green pickup or what appeared to be his pickup in the pictures last Friday. He doesn't believe Doulgas Garland and his father, Alvin, have spoken in about seven years. ...

Douglas worked for Alvin but apparently when that business faltered the working relationship ended. It didn't* end on a bad note though apparently. Allen last saw Douglas Garland at Thanksgiving at his in-law's last fall, but he noted, he said Douglas wsas a bit of a loner and he didn't speak to him that much.

*I heard the word "didn't." Please correct me if you guys heard it differently.

If they had found blood, hair, fingerprints or DNA in that truck isn't it safe to say they could arrest DG? So we should assume they have not found that thus far? Wouldn't we know that by now??

supernovaNic said:

http://globalnews.ca/news/1438148/missing-family-search-of-rural-home-enters-fourth-day/

This is video of a reporter telling that he spoke with AL (AL's son) and he shares what AL told him.

I transcribed part of it:
We spoke to Allen Liknes who is the son of the missing Alvin Liknes. He is married to Garland's sister, and so he told us today on the phone that he was surprised the family was to see Garland's ... green pickup or what appeared to be his pickup in the pictures last Friday. He doesn't believe Doulgas Garland and his father, Alvin, have spoken in about seven years. ...

Click to expand...

Seems like it confirms that they do in fact own the truck, which I know might seem obvious but the police have not said it is theirs.

mrsu said:

If they had found blood, hair, fingerprints or DNA in that truck isn't it safe to say they could arrest DG? So we should assume they have not found that thus far? Wouldn't we know that by now??

Click to expand...

Unless they are stripping it to the bare bones, I am not really sure how long that takes. Maybe they have found things and sent them to forensics? They did say some things they had tested are back and some are not.

cartman said:

They estimate that 200 people attended the Estate Sale yet only 88 have come forward to the Police. I really hope that the remaining attendees speak up - even if they think their trip to the home was insignificant it may not be.

Praying for a positive outcome but with more time that passes it is hard to remain hopeful.

Click to expand...

I wonder about that number. Was someone at the sale counting the number of people? Is it just a guess? Out of the 88 people who have come forward, are those people who were there alone or were they attending the sale with others who may or may not have come forward already?

appleeye said:

How far is Brooks from the scene and the Farm/ Slough?

Were there actually sightings? Are they confirmed? They state that there were some but what did they find out? SO much information out there but no answers.

Click to expand...

The Brooks sightings were unconfirmed. There are no confirmed sightings of the family so far.
[modsnip]

Lots of good information in this video if it hasn't been posted yet.

-family was surprised to see what appears to be DG's pick up in the video
AL and DG hadn't spoke in about seven years
-DG worked for Alvin
-when business faltered, the working relationship ended, it didn't end on a bad note
-ALLEN last saw DG at his in-laws last Thanksgiving and noted he seemed a bit of a loner and didn't speak to him that much
-DG has bail hearing Wednesday

http://globalnews.ca/news/1438148/missing-family-search-of-rural-home-enters-fourth-day/

SnooperDuper said:

LE says that it was led to the farm by a tip (on the 5th) but the ID theft charge relates to some contact between DG and LE the day prior, on July 4. So maybe LE is not telling us everything.

Click to expand...

Yes I am a bit confused about those timelines. If DG did commit the false ID with intent to use for criminal purpose on Jul 4, why the delay in charges? I guess it's possible he gave a fake name when first questioned and it took them a couple days to piece together his real identity. I would have thought the charge date would align with Sunday Jul 6 when he was released from questioning about the Amber Alert but then subsequently taken into custody for the fake ID charge.

SnooperDuper said:

Why should you be disappointed that LE is asking for as much information as possible (instead of as little as possible?)

Click to expand...

That's not what I was disappointed about, it was about the fact that they should have been able to develop the truck link without going public. Perhaps as you say the family didn't assist them or even think about the possible connections. So my disappointment is not specifically in LE or the family or anyone in particular, just the length of time to make the connection and the need to go public when it may not have been necessary.

SnooperDuper said:

However you are assuming that they have video from only one video camera in the neighbourhood. If LE said the truck was circling the neighbourhood they likely have enough video evidence to corroborate that claim.

Click to expand...

You make a good point.

SnooperDuper said:

In what circumstances would it make sense for DG to commit a crime, drive all the way back to Airdrie and return to Parkhill, to revisit the crime scene 1-1/2 hours later, drive away again and reappear in 1-1/2 hours, repeatedly? LE said DG was smart. That seems incredibly dumb.

Click to expand...

"Multiple" could mean as few as 2. It could be as simple as trip 1: commit the crime, trip 2: to and from Airdrie to get cleanup supplies and remove victims.

SnooperDuper said:

Also, just because DG lives in Airdrie does not mean that it is logical for him to bring evidence or bodies all the way back home with him. I think that if there were bodies, a smart man would leave them far away from the place where he lived, in some part of rugged, unpopulated rural Alberta where no one is ever going to find them.

Click to expand...

I quite agree. That's why I initially found it strange that LE was searching in a grid bordering the property, as if a criminal would respect an unmarked property line for disposing weapon or other materials.

SnooperDuper said:

DG is not the property owner in Airdrie. And we can’t say for certain that LE didn’t already know who the truck owner was before Friday.

Click to expand...

I agree, the truck ownership hasn't been established. But there was a report here that DG was the property owner in 2000.

SnooperDuper said:

When LE asked for information on the truck they would have gotten a response from everyone that knew DG had a truck and thought DG might be involved in something like this. That is much more valuable than finding out only who owns the truck from a database. They might have gotten additional info on the path the truck took, or a general idea of how many old green Ford trucks in the LE database are actually road worthy/on the road. In other words, LE released the truck photo in order to get more information.

Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of what you say. But if that were true, LE would just make their whole case file open source, and we know that doesn't happen. They don't publish victim clothes and say "Anywhere know what store this is from?" or a wound photo and say "Can anyone help us find a weapon that matches this shape?" Crowdsourcing of crime solving may be in the future, but it's not the current practice.

They were fairly specific and I believe credible when they published the truck photo and said they were seeking the truck.

SnooperDuper said:

LE might have started out this investigation by asking if KL and AL had any enemies or had been in any disputes with anyone, and LE could have IDed DG as a POI and known about his record (points 6, 4) on the very first day. Then they could have become aware of the truck on surveillance video (1) and linked it to DG (5). They then spent some time developing their case. Only at this time, when they had some info on DG, and perhaps even gone to see him (the ID related charge suggest contact on the 4th), were they ready to tip their hand and show the photos of the truck. Perhaps they hoped DG would be triggered to take some desperate action to make sure his trail was clean. At any rate, they already had enough info on DG to justify a very wide ranging search warrant by the next day.

Click to expand...

I considered this theory before I published. It doesn't fit, at least not properly. If they did already know the truck and its whereabouts and they suspected DG might have hostages or victims and wanted to use the truck fact to provoke him to act, they would have merely leaked general info. "We are seeking a green 1990's pickup truck." That would have been ample, there would be no need for highly specific data including photo to be released, in fact doing so becomes a liability if you already have the truck identified, located, and tied to your suspect.

SnooperDuper said:

The fact that they are searching in Airdrie does not mean that they expect to find things out there, just that LE has to do its due diligence.

Click to expand...

I agree, they need to scour it if for no other reason than they will in the future have to say they were thorough.

huckleberryhound said:

One of the things that Ive wondered about from the beginning in this case, is why would the bodies need to be removed from the house, would'nt it be easier to make it look like a burglary gone bad, it would be hard work and very risky to drag bodies around and transport them in your own vehicle. I think maybe the reason the bodies couldn't be left in the house is that there were not three bodies. Three people going missing is a whole different scenario than if, say, two bodies were found and one person missing. DG has no history of violent crime, but has knowledge of identity theft . He might be a good person to know if you wanted to make yourself disappear.

Click to expand...

Agree, this is a big mystery. What can be gained by moving 3 bodies? It would seem risky with no benefit.

Carol said:

Agree, this is a big mystery. What can be gained by moving 3 bodies? It would seem risky with no benefit.

Click to expand...

Maybe they thought they could destroy all evidence? No evidence no crime.

It is possible AL and DG were in contact without anyone knowing. When my sister was using drugs really heavily she would contact distant family for money and other things, especially when on the outs with closer family. I eventually had to send everyone a warning about her lifestyle and to be careful what they do with her, and if they would contact me if she contacted them. DG may have reached out to AL for some help of some kind and then that went south.

Brooks is approximately 190 km from Calgary. The highway is mostly 110 km/hr .. I'm not terrific at math but about 1 1/2 hours from Calgary proper .... so you could add about 30 or so minutes from Airdrie.

Part of me thinks that they have nothing on DG. I was so hopeful with the searches in Airdrie but it sure doesn't sound like much now.

Getting a new thread started, get ready to move over. A link will be provided so anyone new won't get lost.:smile:

:wagon: all new members!

PrincessButtercup said:

Brooks is approximately 190 km from Calgary. The highway is mostly 110 km/hr .. I'm not terrific at math but about 1 1/2 hours from Calgary proper .... so you could add about 30 or so minutes from Airdrie.

Click to expand...

google maps is a beautiful thing

It's about a 2 hour drive between Airdrie and Brooks.

RCMP and MSM confirmed the Brooks sightings were unfounded so I really wouldn't look much into it.

I really can't see the police putting this much effort into a lead if they don't have -something-. We know they have the truck but I am thinking they may have found ties, rope, tape, or something in that manner further suggesting an abduction of live persons. I keep hoping the kid was dropped off someplace and he pops up. However if they found blood inside the home and someone was injured it would probably show up in the truck rather quickly. If they didn't find anything in the truck I don't think they would be putting this much effort into this lead. It would just not make sense to me.