Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #17

[deugirtni]

From what I have read, we don't really know if PG and ALJr are common-law, or married, or how long they've been together, and I don't recall ever seeing whether any of their children are from a previous relationship or whether any of their children are from 'their' relationship. Has that been stated somewhere?

From photos I've seen, he appeared to be about 12 when Nathan's parents were married, so he should be about 16 years old today. That means that he was born in roughly 1998, when Douglas was a fugitive. I think it's a fairly good guess that Allen and his wife met and started a family well before Douglas met Alvin.

 

[otto]

The difference it makes is that it could mean that section of the fence is movable, or a gate, which could indicate that it opens enough for a vehicle to enter the yard.

Why would a vehicle need to enter the yard? There's an attached garage at the front of the house and a garage at the back of the house.

Regarding the crime scene, the markers are numbered such that they lead from the side entrance of the house to the front parking pad. There are drag marks from that entrance to the front parking pad. Clearly something was taken from the house, out the side door, and dragged to the front of the house.

 

[otto]

From what I have read, we don't really know if PG and ALJr are common-law, or married, or how long they've been together, and I don't recall ever seeing whether any of their children are from a previous relationship or whether any of their children are from 'their' relationship. Has that been stated somewhere?

It doesn't matter whether they are married or not. They have a child that is about 16 years old today. That means that they met when the accused was a fugitive. That means that Allen met his wife, they had a child, Garland was arrested, he spent six months in jail, and some time after that, he met Alvin.

Ohhhhhhhhh, I see. We're going to assume that Allen's oldest son is not his son, and then we can go back to claiming that we don't know whether Alvin met Garland before or after his son met Garland's sister. Why should we assume that Allen's oldest son is not his son?

 

[Sillybilly]

Ohhhhhhhhh, I see. We're going to assume that Allen's oldest son is not his son, and then we can go back to claiming that we don't know whether Alvin met Garland before or after his son met Garland's sister. Why should we assume that Allen's oldest son is not his son?

<rsbm>

We simply don't know either way. Lots of couples enter into relationships with children from previous relationships. A 16 y.o. could have been born to either of them in 1998 and came to live with them as part of a blended family anywhere between then and now.

 

[LoisLane]

Quick note... I am short on time today.. JL is in University and works as a bartender so he is over 18. I believe CL shows his graduation year or we have his dob somewhere maybe FB. Will look later...

Also, Otto I recall you did a rendering of the backyard view of the house... Did you?

 

[LoisLane]

A new article that does reference that it was the amount of blood that gave some signs as to what happened.

"Police later described their disappearance as a homicide, and said the amount of blood found in the Liknes's house suggested at least one person would have been in medical distress because of a violent crime." (BBM)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...knes-memorial-to-be-held-in-calgary-1.2779924

On another note - sending some peace to the families today. I hope this helps with the healing process.

I was looking at something related to this today and it said that on July 4th LE discovered blood in the home. Which I find interesting that it took so long to find it, I wonder if it was well hidden...

 

[otto]

<rsbm>

We simply don't know either way. Lots of couples enter into relationships with children from previous relationships. A 16 y.o. could have been born to either of them in 1998 and came to live with them as part of a blended family anywhere between then and now.

This whole discussion seems to be about denying the obvious. Media articles are shredded as being inaccurate in part because layman's terms replace criminal law terms, police searches for bodies are ignored in favour of believing that the bodies were made to vanish on the Airdrie acreage and police are too dumb to figure it out, there is no evidence that the victims were ever at the Airdrie acreage yet that seems to be presumed true, there's the whole theory about Garland manufacturing drugs today even though there is absolutely nothing to support the claim, and now we're going to assume that Allen's three children are not his three children.

Why would Garland take the victims to his parent's home?

 

[otto]

Quick note... I am short on time today.. JL is in University and works as a bartender so he is over 18. I believe CL shows his graduation year or we have his dob somewhere maybe FB. Will look later...

Also, Otto I recall you did a rendering of the backyard view of the house... Did you?

I did.

 

[deugirtni]

One of our fellow sleuthing members came up with the rather intelligent proposal that perhaps the perp backed up to one of the property's upper decks and that is how the bodies were put onto the truck. We were therefore trying to determine if a vehicle could gain entry to the rear yard.

I think we really don't know whether there may have been additional markers in the rear yard, even though we know from pictures in MSM that there were markers at the side and on the driveway.

And yes, clearly *something*, at *some time*, looked to have been dragged from the side of the front garage onto the driveway, however we really don't know what it was or when it was done, unless of course you have read an MSM article that I am not aware of. If so, please provide a link.

Why would a vehicle need to enter the yard? There's an attached garage at the front of the house and a garage at the back of the house.

Regarding the crime scene, the markers are numbered such that they lead from the side entrance of the house to the front parking pad. There are drag marks from that entrance to the front parking pad. Clearly something was taken from the house, out the side door, and dragged to the front of the house.

 

[otto]

One of our fellow sleuthing members came up with the rather intelligent proposal that perhaps the perp backed up to one of the property's upper decks and that is how the bodies were put onto the truck. We were therefore trying to determine if a vehicle could gain entry to the rear yard.

I think we really don't know whether there may have been additional markers in the rear yard, even though we know from pictures in MSM that there were markers at the side and on the driveway.

And yes, clearly *something*, at *some time*, looked to have been dragged from the side of the front garage onto the driveway, however we really don't know what it was or when it was done, unless of course you have read an MSM article that I am not aware of. If so, please provide a link.

If a portion of the fence was removed and a truck was backed onto the back lawn, why were the crime scene markers sequentially placed from the side door to the front parking pad? How could the fence be removed when clearly there are 4x4 posts in the ground holding up the fence, and there's clearly an absence of a gate structure on the back fence? Should we forget what a fence looks like? If there are drag marks spanning eight feet on the side of the house leading to the front of the house, then something was simply dragged ... most likely a body.

"Drag marks could be seen near evidence tags on the walkway of a home where three people were reported missing Monday. Police would not comment on the drag marks, which ran about eight metres from a side door to the driveway and appeared to be a dark liquid that was recently cleaned up."

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/07/0...lgary-grandparents-and-young-boy-went-missing

I've read all the theories about leaky garbage being dragged to the front of the house. We simply have to ignore the fact that the garbage bins were in the back alley, and that theory makes perfect sense. I'm going to stick with the fact that the garbage bins were at the back of the house, so the dark liquid stain spanning 8 metres from the door to the parking spot is probably blood from one of the three bodies that were removed from the bloody crime scene to the parked truck. There's no reason to introduce bags of garbage and wheel barrows when there's no wheelbarrow in the back of the suspect's truck, and there's no reason for someone to be dragging leaky garbage to the front yard after a garage sale when the owners don't even have time to take down the garage sale sign.

 

[deugirtni]

It doesn't matter whether they are married or not. They have a child that is about 16 years old today. That means that they met when the accused was a fugitive. That means that Allen met his wife, they had a child, Garland was arrested, he spent six months in jail, and some time after that, he met Alvin.

That means there are an awful lot of assumptions going on.

Ohhhhhhhhh, I see. We're going to assume that Allen's oldest son is not his son, and then we can go back to claiming that we don't know whether Alvin met Garland before or after his son met Garland's sister. Why should we assume that Allen's oldest son is not his son?

We can *guess*, but we cannot assume that we know whether ALJr's oldest son is his son from a previous relationship with another woman, or frmo PG's relationship with another man, or the offspring of both ALJr and PG. I'm also not certain that we can assume that DG, while on the run in BC, never visited his family during those 7 or 8 years, and therefore completely write off the possibility that ALJr and PG could have introduced him to AL during that time; and we also can't assume that it wasn't AL who could have first met DG, before ALJr was ever introduced to PG. We really don't have any information in that regard that I am aware of. When we guess at things, we cannot state those things to be facts.

 

[otto]

That means there are an awful lot of assumptions going on.



We can *guess*, but we cannot assume that we know whether ALJr's oldest son is his son from a previous relationship with another woman, or frmo PG's relationship with another man, or the offspring of both ALJr and PG. I'm also not certain that we can assume that DG, while on the run in BC, never visited his family during those 7 or 8 years, and therefore completely write off the possibility that ALJr and PG could have introduced him to AL during that time; and we also can't assume that it wasn't AL who could have first met DG, before ALJr was ever introduced to PG. We really don't have any information in that regard that I am aware of. When we guess at things, we cannot state those things to be facts.

... but we can assume that recently cleaned up dark stain drag marks spanning eight metres with crime scene markers are unrelated to the three murders and the removal of three bodies, that a fence with 4x4 posts every few feet is a gate, that police at no time opened that gate during the crime scene analysis because they didn't know it was there or they were too dumb to realize that this was in fact how the bodies were removed from the property, that three bodies were taken to an Airdrie acreage rather than put in a secluded location, that reporters are incompetent, that the prosecutor did not do his job and provide discovery documents to the defence in a timely manner, that although police walked every inch of the Airdrie acreage there could be a bunker under the crop fields, that although google earth imagery provides photos confirming that the Airdrie acreage is a working farm it's not a working farm, and so on. It seems that each time we have information that allows us to draw conclusions, we should imagine the opposite.

Okay, let's assume that Allen's oldest son is not his son. Then we can continue to believe that Garland, a criminal from an early age, and Alvin, an oil executive, had some sort of relationship, that he was so impressed with Douglas that he socialized with him, and he introduced his son to Garland's sister. This happened prior to 2007, when Alvin and Garland had a falling out due to a bad business deal. This happened after 2001, when Garland was a convicted criminal. Does that make more sense?

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Stan and others (myself included) have always been wondering who met who, who introduced who first and how between PG/DG and the Liknes'.

Maybe just another coincidence here (seems to be a lot these days), but on CH's LinkedIn, looks like she worked in the chemical industry (HR manager) for 8 years. Maybe she met DG through chemicals and introduced him/PG to the Liknes'? The only things wrong is the dates don't align for this to be plausible, as I believe she just started at this company ini 2000 when DG was rearrested, so probably no crossover. But I wonder if she worked elsewhere before this?

Not sleuthing friends, but trying to see if there's a connection via workplace.

And is the chemicals industry big business in Alberta? Seems to come up a lot, I've never know anyone myself who works in chemicals industry and thought it was maybe quite lucrative, but seems to be everywhere these days.

The chemical industry is a big player in Alberta, there are a lot of big chemical companies out here, at least around the Edmonton and Fort Saskatchewan (and now Redwater) areas. Fertilizers, peat moss, land reclamation companies - consultants usually fixing up oil spills, etc. My uncle is a chemical engineer and has spent his working years between Alberta/Saskatchewan and Manitoba. My neice is a chemical technologist and works for a company that does a lot of land reclamation work. The chemistry industry is a big player in the O&G industry I believe as well. Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

I can do better than a mock-up. Here's a photo of the back fence. It seems to be a regular fence.

Great picture of the fence, but something looks odd with the 2x4's going across the section on the right side towards the corner by the garage. Is that additional bracing for some reason? I've never seen a fence built like this unless it was to reinforce a removable section. JMO

 

[otto]

Great picture of the fence, but something looks odd with the 2x4's going across the section on the right side towards the corner by the garage. Is that additional bracing for some reason? I've never seen a fence built like this unless it was to reinforce a removable section. JMO

Many fences have something like that at the alley because many people, especially in the 1960s, had covered garbage bin areas.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

I can do better than a mock-up. Here's a photo of the back fence. It seems to be a regular fence.

Is that a bag of garbage at the back sitting by the fence? I can't really tell, but it kinda looks like a bag of garbage.

 

[Sillybilly]

This whole discussion seems to be about denying the obvious. Media articles are shredded as being inaccurate in part because layman's terms replace criminal law terms, police searches for bodies are ignored in favour of believing that the bodies were made to vanish on the Airdrie acreage and police are too dumb to figure it out, there is no evidence that the victims were ever at the Airdrie acreage yet that seems to be presumed true, there's the whole theory about Garland manufacturing drugs today even though there is absolutely nothing to support the claim, and now we're going to assume that Allen's three children are not his three children.

Why would Garland take the victims to his parent's home?

I'm not assuming anything either way ... as I said, we don't know, so your calculations wrt the 16 y.o. may or may not apply. Because we don't know, we are no closer to knowing when Alvin and DG met.

 

[Tinkerbel1]

Many fences have something like that at the alley because many people, especially in the 1960s, had covered garbage bin areas.

Yes, I recall having that at our house as well, but it doesn't look like that's what those are for. That section is right by the back gate...the fence post is hidden? Anyway, thought maybe the gate section and the next section were possibly removable.

 

[otto]

I'm not assuming anything either way ... as I said, we don't know, so your calculations wrt the 16 y.o. may or may not apply. Because we don't know, we are no closer to knowing when Alvin and DG met.

Apparently we also don't know whether the green truck in the photos is the same truck that was confiscated from the acreage.

If we take Garland's sister out of the equation, why would they have met? Where would their lives have crossed paths?

 

[Tinkerbel1]

It shouldn't be that difficult to figure out. How old is Allen's oldest son? Was Douglas living in Vancouver when that child was born? If so, then it would mean that Allen and Douglas' sister met, had a child, Douglas was arrested, he went to jail, and he met Alvin afterwards.

I'm sorry, call me confused, I won't be offended...but who said PG and AL(jr) had a child shortly after they met? Maybe they were highschool sweethearts? Just because Douglas was living in Vancouver when the child was born, does not necessarily mean he didn't know Allen Liknes prior to his Vancouver days...and/or Alvin for that matter. I'm not getting your line of reasoning Otto, sorry, it just confuses me.