Still Missing Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 *Guilty* *Appeal* #29

If you felt a shiver of satisfaction when you heard about DG's beating, don't feel guilty about it. No one can tell you how to feel. It's just that, a feeling. It has been a long, sad, shocking trial, and so much suffering has come about due to DG's depraved actions. We don't have to feel sympathy for him now. We can feel what we feel.

I support every prisoner's right to safety, legal counsel, etc. I supported DG's right to a vigorous defence. I support defence lawyers doing their job, and I'm glad they exist.

But - if I "feel" a little bit of pleasure, knowing DG had a scary moment at the remand centre, where 4 dudes jumped him and roughed him up enough to go to the hospital - my "feeling" has done not one thing to violate his rights. I didn't hire the ****s and ask them to pound DG. They'll face the consequences of their actions.

There are rules and procedures in place to keep prisoners safe. Like many rules and procedures, sometimes they get broken. The system can look at what went wrong, punish the offenders, and try to improve the situation so it doesn't happen again. I hope that happens. But I don't care if DG had a bad couple days.
IMO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Was the conclusion that he tortured AL and KL solely or mostly based on what's found on his hard drive (Internet searches and torture images)? Was there evidence that he actually did torture them? Was there evidence that he tortured KL in a different way than AL? This latter seems to be mere speculation? There is a slight chance (no reason to exclude the possibility, however faint, do we?) that either or both of them had passed away too soon for him to do what he may have planned to do with them alive. Of course, there is also the likelihood (perhaps much more likely) that he did much worse. One of the saddest part about this crime is that the victims can never tell their loved ones how much they had suffered before leaving the world.
 
If you felt a shiver of satisfaction when you heard about DG's beating, don't feel guilty about it. No one can tell you how to feel. It's just that, a feeling. It has been a long, sad, shocking trial, and so much suffering has come about due to DG's depraved actions. We don't have to feel sympathy for him now. We can feel what we feel.

I support every prisoner's right to safety, legal counsel, etc. I supported DG's right to a vigorous defence. I support defence lawyers doing their job, and I'm glad they exist.

But - if I "feel" a little bit of pleasure, knowing DG had a scary moment at the remand centre, where 4 dudes jumped him and roughed him up enough to go to the hospital - my "feeling" has done not one thing to violate his rights. I didn't hire the ****s and ask them to pound DG. They'll face the consequences of their actions.

There are rules and procedures in place to keep prisoners safe. Like many rules and procedures, sometimes they get broken. The system can look at what went wrong, punish the offenders, and try to improve the situation so it doesn't happen again. I hope that happens. But I don't care if DG had a bad couple days.
IMO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Good points! In my opinion, what bothers me is not so much that Garlands rights were violated.

It's more about elevating other convicts to hero status for beating him up, as if it's okay that criminals be given the right to pick and choose how justice is delivered. It's highly possible any one of those four sold drugs to someone's underage child or raped someone's sister. There is no such thing as a victimless crime. So then who inflicts "prison justice" to that one?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Good points! In my opinion, what bothers me is not so much that Garlands rights were violated.

It's more about elevating other convicts to hero status for beating him up, as if it's okay that criminals be given the right to pick and choose how justice is delivered. It's highly possible any one of those four sold drugs to someone's underage child or raped someone's sister. There is no such thing as a victimless crime. So then who inflicts "prison justice" to that one?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thank you. I see your point.

True, some have elevated these assailants to hero status. But even elevating them to hero status in this instance is just more "feelings". It's not a pronouncement that they now "have a right" - feelings don't change the law and bestow new rights on inmates to commit assault on other inmates, it just says "I feel glad they did this to DG". Feelings are harmless.

Obviously the dudes that did this have committed some kind of crime to land them in jail. Saying "I feel glad this happened to DG" doesn't absolve them of their crimes, nor does it make them more likely to commit more crime. No one has sent them a letter of congratulation. Some people just feel "okay" knowing DG took a beating.

Objectively, I uphold every inmates rights. But it doesn't mean I have to feel bad that DG got roughed up by 4 guys.

I'm saving my sympathy for the L and OB families.

Moo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Good points! In my opinion, what bothers me is not so much that Garlands rights were violated.

It's more about elevating other convicts to hero status for beating him up, as if it's okay that criminals be given the right to pick and choose how justice is delivered. It's highly possible any one of those four sold drugs to someone's underage child or raped someone's sister. There is no such thing as a victimless crime. So then who inflicts "prison justice" to that one?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It's not us who elevates anyone.

Inside a jail is a completely different world with its own status and laws and the inmates all have their place in that system.

If there's some 'bad guy' who's as aghast as I am that a grown man would beat, murder, dismember and burn a child's body and sees fit to show his disdain to that man in any way he sees fit in his world ... well, so be it.

If he is then given kudos by other inmates for laying one on a child killer ... so be it.
 
Was the conclusion that he tortured AL and KL solely or mostly based on what's found on his hard drive (Internet searches and torture images)? Was there evidence that he actually did torture them? Was there evidence that he tortured KL in a different way than AL? This latter seems to be mere speculation? There is a slight chance (no reason to exclude the possibility, however faint, do we?) that either or both of them had passed away too soon for him to do what he may have planned to do with them alive. Of course, there is also the likelihood (perhaps much more likely) that he did much worse. One of the saddest part about this crime is that the victims can never tell their loved ones how much they had suffered before leaving the world.

Without bodies one cannot ever say exactly how torture occurred. The judge, crown and jury all agree that the research, subsequent purchasing of the researched torture items and DNA found on said items and the burning (plus DNA erase products) to Dispose of the items (some of them anyways) is enough to prove that torture took place.
 
Thank you. I see your point.

True, some have elevated these assailants to hero status. But even elevating them to hero status in this instance is just more "feelings". It's not a pronouncement that they now "have a right" - feelings don't change the law and bestow new rights on inmates to commit assault on other inmates, it just says "I feel glad they did this to DG". Feelings are harmless.

Obviously the dudes that did this have committed some kind of crime to land them in jail. Saying "I feel glad this happened to DG" doesn't absolve them of their crimes, nor does it make them more likely to commit more crime. No one has sent them a letter of congratulation. Some people just feel "okay" knowing DG took a beating.

Objectively, I uphold every inmates rights. But it doesn't mean I have to feel bad that DG got roughed up by 4 guys.

I'm saving my sympathy for the L and OB families.

Moo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes there's certainly various ways of viewing it.

Just another thought.......I really wonder if this beating happened by accident as the timing is somewhat suspect. I strongly suspect there may have been some collaboration going on at the remand centre that involved both the guards and the four prisoners. If that's the case, it's possible the four prisoners were used much like human pit bulls while the guards deliberately turned a blind eye.

I'm very glad the CPS is looking into it.
 
Yes there's certainly various ways of viewing it.

Just another thought.......I really wonder if this beating happened by accident as the timing is somewhat suspect. I strongly suspect there may have been some collaboration going on at the remand centre that involved both the guards and the four prisoners. If that's the case, it's possible the four prisoners were used much like pit bulls while the guards deliberately turned a blind eye.

I'm very glad the CPS is looking into it.
There's always a chance - no matter how slim - that the beating had zero to do with his conviction. He may have owed someone tater tots. He may have sat in the wrong chair. Glanced at the wrong dude. We don't know. I've been watching "60 days in" and seeing the dumb things inmates will beat each other for leaves my eyes open to other possibilities even if I'd prefer it occurred because of his conviction.
 
There's always a chance - no matter how slim - that the beating had zero to do with his conviction. He may have owed someone tater tots. He may have sat in the wrong chair. Glanced at the wrong dude. We don't know. I've been watching "60 days in" and seeing the dumb things inmates will beat each other for leaves my eyes open to other possibilities even if I'd prefer it occurred because of his conviction.

That it was all a coincidence, no I don't think so.

We can only assume the four assailants attacked through their own free will, to demonstrate to the public that the 'ole prison justice system indeed is alive and well.

CPS is investigating and so they should.
 
Good points! In my opinion, what bothers me is not so much that Garlands rights were violated.

It's more about elevating other convicts to hero status for beating him up, as if it's okay that criminals be given the right to pick and choose how justice is delivered. It's highly possible any one of those four sold drugs to someone's underage child or raped someone's sister. There is no such thing as a victimless crime. So then who inflicts "prison justice" to that one?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Exactly. And how will we feel if DG beats up some other offender?

Maybe we should go back to solitary confinement 24/7.
 
Anything is possible with DG. Maybe he instigated a beating so he could go to the hospital. Not that it absolves the 4 dudes for the assault.

I hope it's all on video so LE gets to the bottom of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
My understanding, Three Events -- (Otto in reply to your previous comments)

Garland's grudge was against Alvin. The murder, proven to be planned and deliberate. The penalty to society, 25 years.

But Over time, Garland had also began stalking Kathy and given the evidence on the hard drive, she became the focus of his deviant obsession involving females including autopsy of the female anatomy. Nothing whatsoever to do with the grudge. That Garland used her to inflict added torture upon him, there's no reason to speculate since we have an opportunity to "see into the window of Garland's mind" by evidence contained on the hard drive. He intended to dominate a female victim.

Garland planned a time and location to enact a murder plot to be sure to murder two people, not just one, and he physically targeted each of them in two different locations in the house, each for a different reason. Two events - 50 years.

This is precisely the type of situation where consecutive sentences should be applied to double the penalty because of the deliberate intention to murder two people instead of one is not deserving of a two for one deal. That fits my definition of using common sense.

By removing Nathan from the home, injured or not, Garland made a conscious decision to murder a third victim to remove any possible witnesses, even though he wasn't in the original plan. His choice. Another event. Three events. 75 years.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
The wigs and women's stuffs he kept were either for disguise (e.g. during the recon missions) or personal obsession, or both. He may have even gone to the estate sale disguised as a woman. Since the sale appeared to be inside the house, he could have observed the rooms and doors' locations etc. then.

I still think he had masked himself when he went to the Liknes' house. It's easier to attack when the victims were totally clueless who you are and why it's happening, and they may have more fear because they had no idea what kind of person you are. This especially if he planned to take them to the farm and then reveal his identity.

I don't think he would have risked going to the sale as he would leave his DNA there.
 
During the first search an officer looked into the black bag where the billylclub and handcuff's were found. After DG was stopped during the traffic stop an LE officer took his shoes. This was the illegal evidence obtained. The hard drive and other evidence found on the acreage was found during the second legal search.
This has concerned me also. The lack of a search warrant allowed LE to search and find missing people who were in danger. It didn't allow (per the defense) searching into small spaces where a human couldn't be found (eg where the computer hard drive was hidden in the ceiling). The relevance of the circumstantial evidence in the hard drive was a major factor in determining the consecutive sentence IMO.
 
Anything is possible with DG. Maybe he instigated a beating so he could go to the hospital. Not that it absolves the 4 dudes for the assault.

I hope it's all on video so LE gets to the bottom of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

These beatings happen every day in prisons across Canada. If this gets looked into further it is only because of the publicity DG's crimes have brought. If he was any other inmate no one takes the time to get to the bottom of this.
 
Anything is possible with DG. Maybe he instigated a beating so he could go to the hospital. Not that it absolves the 4 dudes for the assault.

I hope it's all on video so LE gets to the bottom of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes me too. The worst case scenario in my opinion would be four ****s were coerced into creating a show for the public, enticed to hit and kick an old man (average age by prison standards) in the back or head in return for either safety or a drug fix.

I guess that my view is tainted because I've come to believe through people who are more closely connected to the prison system than I that a lot of what occurs in prisons is still Criminal Organization and drug related, exactly what the rest of us honest and law abiding folk want locked away. What goes on isn't much different than on the outside and for the majority, that rehabilitation is the outcome is almost a joke. When they're released it just means they've sunk to a lower level of what's "normal"


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Those locked up are subjected to the depravity of criminals who are serving time with them. They are all locked up like animals because that is the reality of prison. I agree that that all prisoners should be protected from the violence and sexual assault rampant in prisons, and many should have the opportunity for rehabilitation. But I'm not hoping that someone like DG is being kept "comfortable", and I don't think he can be rehabilitated. I don't consider him an "unfortunate" member of society who deserves respect. He is a monster. You just seem to ignore that. He deserves no sympathy or respect from society.

He is a waste of skin, having proved he has no respect for human life, and inflicted horrendous pain to victims. I have zero sympathy for him.
 
I was reading about our prisons in Canada and I forget which one but I'm sure a few allow play stations and TVs in their units. This upsets me. I feel privileges like this are ridiculous. Maybe a tv in a common area and if you can't see or hear tough luck. Read a book. Jmo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
134
Guests online
1,047
Total visitors
1,181

Forum statistics

Threads
589,928
Messages
17,927,789
Members
228,003
Latest member
Knovah
Back
Top