appleeye
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2013
- Messages
- 461
- Reaction score
- 194
Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 June 2014 - #8
- Thread starter Sillybilly
- Start date
- Status
musicaljoke
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2013
- Messages
- 7,139
- Reaction score
- 37,115
And we don't know if those bags were being carried away as evidence, or if the cop was just carrying a couple of random bags.
mrazda71
Former Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2014
- Messages
- 3,138
- Reaction score
- 11,413
http://globalnews.ca/news/1449500/person-of-interest-in-missing-family-case-re-arrested/
On the extended video - questions from reporters - At 6.55 someone asks if they are the only things the POI will an charged with - I interpreted his answer as 'we will look at unsolved cases and see if the POI could have possibley been involved' ...
palisadesk
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 354
- Reaction score
- 51
I don't know how to quote from the previous thread, but it isn't essential.
Several people brought up the topic of a plea resolution agreement and I thought some useful points could be made that not everyone would necessarily know or think of.
The Karla Homolka example was an egregious miscarriage of "justice" but I think it unlikely that something similar will happen here or in any other high-profile case; in part, we may hope, lessons may have been learned from that debacle, but also, the factors that made the KH situation work out the way it did were due largely to mismanagement, incompetence and downright dishonesty on the part of the officials involved (I don't mean the police specifically, although they had their issues, which were discussed and solutions addressed in the Galligan report) but the top of the food chain, the Attorney General's office. KH breached the terms of her agreement, which gave the government the opportunity (this was after the finding of the tapes etc.) to negate it, and her other victim, "Jane Doe" wished to press charges. The AG stepped in and refused to enforce the conditions, obstructed Jane Doe's case, and even lied to Justice Galligan, saying that they did not proceed because Jane had asked them not to, and Jane is adamant this is totally false. So, while this is a little off-topic, the point is that KH's "deal with the devil" can be blamed on the government of the day and the uproar was so great (government was defeated shortly afterward) that a similar abuse of the process is unlikely.
Now in this case, caution is advised where jumping to too many conclusions is concerned. Only one suspect has been named and is going to be charged, and police have said they are not looking for anyone else, but that does not mean the suspect is necessarily the only perpetrator or even the major one. LE saying they are not looking for someone else does not mean they have ruled out the possibility, and they would be foolish to do so this early on without compelling reason.
Think of the Pickton case; he was the only one charged and convicted but anyone who has studied the case will be certain he had accomplices and accessories of some sort along the way -- he is a cognitively challenged, low-ability individual with limited skills in many areas. I'm sure the victims' families feel that justice has not been done because others involved have never suffered consequences, and the truth has never come out in full.
It sounds as though this investigation is much more controlled, focused and organized. That is promising. There may be much more to the story and they need time to get as much evidence as possible. Throwing the book at one suspect may make others (if there are others, which is certainly possible) less cautious. We can't know one way or another.
But, somewhere down the road, a plea resolution agreement is possible and might be a good thing. It would not need to (nor would it be permitted to) resemble the KH deal. As pointed out on the previous thread, conviction brings mandatory sentences, which are non-negotiable.
But. The authorities have other cards to play. The one that first occurs to me is the result of the change in legislation to permit consecutive life terms in Canada (up until recently they had to be served concurrently). This could mean that a conviction on all three counts could lead to 75 years without parole -- longer than an adult accused's probably life expectancy. So a deal might be made that agreed to two of three consecutive sentences, or some other variation. Or, it could involve an agreement to serve the sentence in a particular (appropriate) federal prison, near family members, for instance. It does not need to involve much "watering down" of the charges but could be in the interest of justice if the person discloses not only the location of the bodies but the particulars of any accomplices if there are any. This could enable apprehension of others, equally guilty, if there are such (my hunch is that it's a 50-50 chance he had one or more, playing either a supporting or enabling role if not more).
As for a "dangerous offender" designation" normally, a murder conviction does not warrant such, as the offender will be locked up for a long time and only released if the parole board agrees. "Dangerous offender" status is for repeat convictions (two or three or more) for sexual assault or violent crimes which singly do not yield long sentences, so the D.O. designation is sought in the public interest to keep this repeat offender locked up. Bernardo got the designation not because of his murder convictions, but because of the rape convictions.
"Insanity" defences are hard to win (a different topic); a better angle (from a legal point of view) is "not criminally responsible" which is sometimes a successful plea for a person with severe intellectual disability or mental illness (not just someone with psychiatric issues). It is hard to prove and even if successful, the person will be confined until authorities are convinced he or she is safe to release with conditions.
Kinda long, sorry, but hope it helps.
Several people brought up the topic of a plea resolution agreement and I thought some useful points could be made that not everyone would necessarily know or think of.
The Karla Homolka example was an egregious miscarriage of "justice" but I think it unlikely that something similar will happen here or in any other high-profile case; in part, we may hope, lessons may have been learned from that debacle, but also, the factors that made the KH situation work out the way it did were due largely to mismanagement, incompetence and downright dishonesty on the part of the officials involved (I don't mean the police specifically, although they had their issues, which were discussed and solutions addressed in the Galligan report) but the top of the food chain, the Attorney General's office. KH breached the terms of her agreement, which gave the government the opportunity (this was after the finding of the tapes etc.) to negate it, and her other victim, "Jane Doe" wished to press charges. The AG stepped in and refused to enforce the conditions, obstructed Jane Doe's case, and even lied to Justice Galligan, saying that they did not proceed because Jane had asked them not to, and Jane is adamant this is totally false. So, while this is a little off-topic, the point is that KH's "deal with the devil" can be blamed on the government of the day and the uproar was so great (government was defeated shortly afterward) that a similar abuse of the process is unlikely.
Now in this case, caution is advised where jumping to too many conclusions is concerned. Only one suspect has been named and is going to be charged, and police have said they are not looking for anyone else, but that does not mean the suspect is necessarily the only perpetrator or even the major one. LE saying they are not looking for someone else does not mean they have ruled out the possibility, and they would be foolish to do so this early on without compelling reason.
Think of the Pickton case; he was the only one charged and convicted but anyone who has studied the case will be certain he had accomplices and accessories of some sort along the way -- he is a cognitively challenged, low-ability individual with limited skills in many areas. I'm sure the victims' families feel that justice has not been done because others involved have never suffered consequences, and the truth has never come out in full.
It sounds as though this investigation is much more controlled, focused and organized. That is promising. There may be much more to the story and they need time to get as much evidence as possible. Throwing the book at one suspect may make others (if there are others, which is certainly possible) less cautious. We can't know one way or another.
But, somewhere down the road, a plea resolution agreement is possible and might be a good thing. It would not need to (nor would it be permitted to) resemble the KH deal. As pointed out on the previous thread, conviction brings mandatory sentences, which are non-negotiable.
But. The authorities have other cards to play. The one that first occurs to me is the result of the change in legislation to permit consecutive life terms in Canada (up until recently they had to be served concurrently). This could mean that a conviction on all three counts could lead to 75 years without parole -- longer than an adult accused's probably life expectancy. So a deal might be made that agreed to two of three consecutive sentences, or some other variation. Or, it could involve an agreement to serve the sentence in a particular (appropriate) federal prison, near family members, for instance. It does not need to involve much "watering down" of the charges but could be in the interest of justice if the person discloses not only the location of the bodies but the particulars of any accomplices if there are any. This could enable apprehension of others, equally guilty, if there are such (my hunch is that it's a 50-50 chance he had one or more, playing either a supporting or enabling role if not more).
As for a "dangerous offender" designation" normally, a murder conviction does not warrant such, as the offender will be locked up for a long time and only released if the parole board agrees. "Dangerous offender" status is for repeat convictions (two or three or more) for sexual assault or violent crimes which singly do not yield long sentences, so the D.O. designation is sought in the public interest to keep this repeat offender locked up. Bernardo got the designation not because of his murder convictions, but because of the rape convictions.
"Insanity" defences are hard to win (a different topic); a better angle (from a legal point of view) is "not criminally responsible" which is sometimes a successful plea for a person with severe intellectual disability or mental illness (not just someone with psychiatric issues). It is hard to prove and even if successful, the person will be confined until authorities are convinced he or she is safe to release with conditions.
Kinda long, sorry, but hope it helps.
Since they haven't formally charged him with any murders yet (over 15 hrs. later) what did they get him on to get him back into custody? Here's hoping he has some conscience and tells where to find the bodies 
lease:. Sad outcome for the families Condolences sent to them at this sad turn of events
lease:. Sad outcome for the families Condolences sent to them at this sad turn of events 
Bravo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2011
- Messages
- 20,354
- Reaction score
- 64,574
Just a point I wanted to bring up for those not familiar with Canadian Cases. Don't let the Publication Bans influence you. I know it's hard to follow cases when it takes years to get to Trial. We don't allow camera's in the Courtroom presently but I do invite you to follow Canadian Trials your interested in. We do allow live tweets from the Courtroom. Presently it seems generally granted by Judges. I have followed a few and some of the Reporters tweeting gave excellent accounts. If there is something discussed out of the presence of the Jury reporters cannot tweet. Any I have followed the press respects this. However if u happen to be in the Courtroom you are privy to it. Typically comes out after a Verdict.
Since they haven't formally charged him with any murders yet (over 15 hrs. later) what did they get him on to get him back into custody? Here's hoping he has some conscience and tells where to find the bodies
I think it was breach of bail conditions? He was out at 1:30 am, when his curfew is at 7 pm.
toastburner
New Member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 0
I've just got caught up on today's threads and the bad news... tragic. Sadness and anger; words beyond that fail me.
Canadagurl
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2013
- Messages
- 162
- Reaction score
- 318
From what I see the stats are only up to 2012 and not really a lot to see...
ETA: The link ... http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/legal12a-eng.htm
PrincessButtercup
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 693
- Reaction score
- 88
They can arrest him and hold him up to 48 hours (I believe this is the timeframe, someone correct me if I'm wrong) before the formal charges are laid. So he could be arrested in connection with the murders.Since they haven't formally charged him with any murders yet (over 15 hrs. later) what did they get him on to get him back into custody? Here's hoping he has some conscience and tells where to find the bodies
Bravo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2011
- Messages
- 20,354
- Reaction score
- 64,574
Thanks. I fear we will see somebody look into this. Given our Crimes as of late.
Bravo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2011
- Messages
- 20,354
- Reaction score
- 64,574
Yes it was all over the news stations today. Listening to CTV right now.
I am devastated. All I can think about is that little boy. What kind of person would harm a little boy? My God, take the grandparents if you need to, just leave the kid be. I'm having trouble processing the news, I can't imagine what his parents are feeling.
Bravo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2011
- Messages
- 20,354
- Reaction score
- 64,574
I know. I hear you. I just pray it was quick. I have no words.
Yes, the Canadian homicide stats online just take us to 2012, but the ongoing trend has been downwards, as has also been the case in the US, so let's presume that trend has continued and meanwhile, have a look at the 2012 info anyway and compare those stats with those of our neighbors. (Incidentally, I suggest that all murders are horrible, so I'm not sure there's a way to usefully qualify degrees of heinous.)
There were 543 homicides recorded in Canada in 2012, down 10 per cent from the previous year.
http://globalnews.ca/news/1040722/canadas-2012-homicide-rate-at-lowest-level-in-nearly-50-years-statscan/
USA reported its lowest rate in 4 decades, with 14,827 homicides reported.
http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2013/september/latest-crime-stats-released/latest-crime-stats-released
POPULATION OF CANADA (2013) 35,158,300
POPULATION USA (2013) 315,091,138
So the US population is approximately 9 times that of Canada, a multiplier that has remained more or less constant for decades.
Therefore, to match the US homicide rate on a per capita basis, 4,887 persons would need to fall victim to murder. However, as it turns out Canada actually has just 1/9th the per capita percentage of US homicides. Not 9 times, but 1/9th as many.
Murder is an aberration. The odds against your ever confronting a murderer or having anyone you know fall victim to homicide are overwhelmingly in your favour.
To further put fear and anxiety about the safety and security of oneself and one's loved ones into perspective, here's some more stats about more probable potential causes of your sudden death by forces outside your control.
• Be killed in a terrorist attack while travelling (1 in 650,000).
• Die — during an average lifetime — of flesh-eating disease (1 in one million).
• Be killed by lightning (1 in 56,439).
To put it another way, "Say you're standing on a football field. You're blindfolded and holding a pin. A friend has released an ant on the field. Your chance of piercing that ant with your pin is about one in 14 million, the same odds as winning a 6/49 jackpot. " Maybe add another ant or throw in a second throw if you want to more or less approach those homicide stats.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/lotteries-what-are-the-odds-1.775281
- Status