Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #18

[LoisLane]

I assume you're not asking this because you believe the accused should be immediately convicted. We don't want that, the accused has the right to a defence. I also don't think we have a court process so that we can think up alternate theories of the crime. It's possible the defence could try this approach, but depending on the quality of the evidence against the accused, it might not do much good. For example, there would have to be some sort of evidence besides a handful of "pseudo-cide" anecdotes to counter, say, DNA evidence found on the boots of the accused, or gallons of the victims' blood at the crime scene, with expert testimony that no one could survive that degree of blood loss. With that kind of evidence, theories about disappearances-staged-as-death would be a pretty silly defence strategy.

The court process will bring to light, at long last, the evidence against the accused. LE's case will be tested. The question is not "did he do it?", but rather "Is there enough evidence to convict?"

Sure. I guess we will wait to see if DG applies for bail. He is a flight risk so maybe he won't bother. I don't know how much evidence can be presented at the time of bail application to give him grounds for release from custody. Let's say he does apply and it isn't granted. Is that a sick attempt from DG to endure suffering of his victims or an attempt to reveal that the prosecution might not have enough pieces to form a conviction?

ETA: I have had read thru your post again. If the evidence you suggest comes forward (BBM) I would be more convinced that the investigation has the evidence to prove the suspect charged is guilty. We have no idea if DNA evidence will amount to what you are speculating (BBM) as LE is not willing to reveal a detail or comment that they have DNA evidence to prove the victims are deceased.

 

[winnnancy]

Sure. I guess we will wait to see if DG applies for bail. He is a flight risk so maybe he won't bother. I don't know how much evidence can be presented at the time of bail application to give him grounds for release from custody. Let's say he does apply and it isn't granted. Is that a sick attempt from DG to endure suffering of his victims or an attempt to reveal that the prosecution might not have enough pieces to form a conviction?

Can't begin to guess at possible motives on a hypothetical situation. By now however, disclosure is surely likely to have occurred? and KR at the very least would have likely had an opportunity to have skimmed through it. If this is true, he would already have a good idea of how weighty the evidence is. I'm only guessing but I don't believe any lawyer would leave a client in jail a second longer than required. Why then has DG not been released on bail? Is it flight risk alone?

 

[LoisLane]

Can't begin to guess at possible motives on a hypothetical situation. By now however, disclosure is surely likely to have occurred? and KR at the very least would have likely had an opportunity to have skimmed through it. If this is true, he would already have a good idea of how weighty the evidence is. I'm only guessing but I don't believe any lawyer would leave a client in jail a second longer than required. Why then has DG not been released on bail? Is it flight risk alone?

I assume that the defense has full disclosure by now and has a good idea as to what they are dealing with and at the same time has had some discussion with the client. Can a lawyer request a bail hearing after they already had the preliminary hearing? Do they have to wait until the next court date?

 

[Sillybilly]

The court process will bring to light, at long last, the evidence against the accused. LE's case will be tested. The question is not "did he do it?", but rather "Is there enough evidence to convict?"

<rsbm>

enough evidence to convict 'beyond a reasonable doubt'; not just having a shadow of a doubt, or because the defence suggests that somewhere, sometime, someone was successful at pseudocide, and even if the verdict is Not Guilty, it doesn't equate to a declaration that the accused has been found innocent.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I was pondering that the other night. I wonder if the family used her email address to have the password reset or possibly they were able to easily access the account and they shut it off. Or somehow LE or the family contacted FB to request the activity to be halted or to gain access to it if they couldn't retrieve the password themselves. Or as you mention it becomes inactive after 30 days of inactivity.

It always spooked me a little when two people attempted to make contact with her by posting a comment, the game app was still active at the time. The game app. appears on the account as if the person is actually playing it. Possiblly the two people (one was her brother) are not aware of that and thought it was possible KL was playing a game.

I know a couple persons who passed away and their FB is still active, I think some friends and family like this so they can leave messages and reminisce with those gone. I did look up FB's protocols if family want to deactivate a deceased person and it is as follows if anyone's curious (BBM):

"How do I submit a special request for a deceased person's account on the site?

We will process certain special requests for verified immediate family members, including requests to remove their loved one's account. This will completely remove the profile and all associated content from Facebook, so no one can view it.

For all special requests, we require verification that you are an immediate family member or executor. Requests will not be processed if we are unable to verify your relationship to the deceased person.

Examples of documentation that we will accept include:
The deceased person's birth certificate
The deceased person's death certificate
Proof of authority under local law that you are the lawful representative of the deceased person, or his/her estate

If you are an immediate family member and would like to request that we remove your loved one's account from the site, please contact us. You may also use this form if you have a special request regarding the deceased person's account."

I agree though Lois, it's always a little eerie to see activity on a deceased person's profile.

 

[deugirtni]

I was thinking about that.. and realized that those who HAVE been successful... we will never really know how many, or even the percentage of success amongst those who try.. because they HAVEN'T been caught. (Yet). And those who haven't been caught, may be presumed dead, so we have no numbers to work with.

It's important to note that none of the people in that article were successful in their respective attempts at faking their deaths and many faced charges when caught. It's not as easy to pull off as some would like to believe. :moo:

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Just for fun, don't forget Olivia Newton John's boyfriend *might* have faked his own death:

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...tt-found-mexico-faking-death-article-1.163863

 

[Lalalacasbah]

People are missing the point about the 'alive theory' -

First, if this is/was happening the planners would not be outsmarting LE or ME, obviously, because one of the planners is actually in jail (DG), so this makes LE smart

Second, LE wouldn't be technically lying, since evidence says a crime occurred and they have a suspect for it, they just might not have all or the other suspect (the other planner). So LE isn't being fooled at all but would in fact be 'playing along' to track down the other planner.

Just sayin, I'm not on a particular side, but do like to think of possible angles.

 

[news.talk]

People are missing the point about the 'alive theory' -

First, if this is/was happening the planners would not be outsmarting LE or ME, obviously, because one of the planners is actually in jail (DG), so this makes LE smart

Second, LE wouldn't be technically lying, since evidence says a crime occurred and they have a suspect for it, they just might not have all or the other suspect (the other planner). So LE isn't being fooled at all but would in fact be 'playing along' to track down the other planner.

Just sayin, I'm not on a particular side, but do like to think of possible angles.

I have honestly NEVER seen or heard of LE being involved in an elaborate plan to warrant this scenario. The case is before the courts suggesting that for the most part, the investigation has been completed.

The victim's family have had memorial services and death certificates would have had to be issued.

I cannot buy that the CPS would be part of a large scale ruse of this extent. It is beyond probable.

 

[stan laurel]

It's important to note that none of the people in that article were successful in their respective attempts at faking their deaths and many faced charges when caught. It's not as easy to pull off as some would like to believe. :moo:

newstalk mentioned not hearing of any cases, I had never really looked into it and found a nifty article, tiz all, and I posted it. tahhh dahhh!

 

[Slebby]

Sure. I guess we will wait to see if DG applies for bail. He is a flight risk so maybe he won't bother. I don't know how much evidence can be presented at the time of bail application to give him grounds for release from custody. Let's say he does apply and it isn't granted. Is that a sick attempt from DG to endure suffering of his victims or an attempt to reveal that the prosecution might not have enough pieces to form a conviction?

ETA: I have had read thru your post again. If the evidence you suggest comes forward (BBM) I would be more convinced that the investigation has the evidence to prove the suspect charged is guilty. We have no idea if DNA evidence will amount to what you are speculating (BBM) as LE is not willing to reveal a detail or comment that they have DNA evidence to prove the victims are deceased.

I wasn't speculating. The sentence you partially bolded began "for example", and I went on to give examples of both an alternate theory ("pseudo-cide") as well as possible evidence (example: blood on clothes, or example: evidence of huge blood volume loss)

Of course we have no idea about the evidence. But not knowing the evidence is not the same as saying there is no evidence. The reason LE hasn't shared the evidence publicly has been explained here again and again. Our not knowing what it is doesn't cause me to doubt that LE does, in fact have evidence, not at all.

I think you missed the point I was making altogether, which was in response to the query about why have a court proceeding. My point - it is not primarily to air alternative theories. The defence could bring them up if it seems like a sound strategy. An alternate theory (such as faked death) would be of no use if it fails to trump solid evidence, if it exists.

IMO

 

[Slebby]

<rsbm>

enough evidence to convict 'beyond a reasonable doubt'; not just having a shadow of a doubt, or because the defence suggests that somewhere, sometime, someone was successful at pseudocide, and even if the verdict is Not Guilty, it doesn't equate to a declaration that the accused has been found innocent.

Exactly.

 

[news.talk]

newstalk mentioned not hearing of any cases, I had never really looked into it and found a nifty article, tiz all, and I posted it. tahhh dahhh!

The question remains - Why would THESE people, fake their own deaths and take along a five year old child that wasn't even part of the plan? There is zero evidence that they would put their surviving grandchildren, daughter and other family members through the horrendous grieving process for monetary gain. There are no legal issues they were trying to avoid, no child custody disputes, nothing... What would be their motive???

The other question would be, could these grandparents actually commit this act of deception? What resources have we or LE uncovered that indicate they have the wherewithal and ability to carry out this plan?

There is no motive, no history of such debauchery and callous behaviour to indicate that faking their deaths and the death of their very beloved daughter's small child is even possible.

On order for this theory to be possible, it first needs to be probable, which it isn't.

 

[stan laurel]

The question remains - Why would THESE people, fake their own deaths and take along a five year old child that wasn't even part of the plan? There is zero evidence that they would put their surviving grandchildren, daughter and other family members through the horrendous grieving process for monetary gain. There are no legal issues they were trying to avoid, no child custody disputes, nothing... What would be their motive???

The other question would be, could these grandparents actually commit this act of deception? What resources have we or LE uncovered that indicates they have the wherewithal and ability to carry out this plan?

There is no motive, no history of such debauchery and callous behaviour to indicate that faking their deaths and the death of their very beloved daughter's small child is even possible.

On order for this theory to be possible, it first needs to be probable, which it isn't.

I'm not of the fake death camp, I'm of the accomplice camp,, I was just posting an interesting article within the horse latitudes.

 

[winnnancy]

The question remains - Why would THESE people, fake their own deaths and take along a five year old child that wasn't even part of the plan? There is zero evidence that they would put their surviving grandchildren, daughter and other family members through the horrendous grieving process for monetary gain. There are no legal issues they were trying to avoid, no child custody disputes, nothing... What would be their motive???

The other question would be, could these grandparents actually commit this act of deception? What resources have we or LE uncovered that indicates they have the wherewithal and ability to carry out this plan?

There is no motive, no history of such debauchery and callous behaviour to indicate that faking their deaths and the death of their very beloved daughter's small child is even possible.

On order for this theory to be possible, it first needs to be probable, which it isn't.

I personally don't subscribe to this theory but including the child, makes it so unpalatable that we dismiss it as not being likely. That would be the beauty of such an ugly plan .If they'd disappeared alone, there would be speculation that they'd run off.

 

[Slebby]

People are missing the point about the 'alive theory' -

First, if this is/was happening the planners would not be outsmarting LE or ME, obviously, because one of the planners is actually in jail (DG), so this makes LE smart

Second, LE wouldn't be technically lying, since evidence says a crime occurred and they have a suspect for it, they just might not have all or the other suspect (the other planner). So LE isn't being fooled at all but would in fact be 'playing along' to track down the other planner.

Just sayin, I'm not on a particular side, but do like to think of possible angles.

OK, can we think through an "alive" theory, just to see where it stands up or falls down?

What is the upside of sitting in jail for DG? Is there a payday in there somewhere? It sounds like a pretty unequal partnership.

Where is NO in the "alive" theory? This theory, like any alternate theories I've tried to imagine, falls down because there is no plausible way to account for how anyone remotely related to him, or the Ls, could ever go through with a disappearance/fake death that explains what happened to NO and why.

IMO

 

[news.talk]

I'm not of the fake death camp, I'm of the accomplice camp,, I was just posting an interesting article within the horse latitudes.

Fair enough.

The question of an accomplice is just as troubling for me...

I have never known a homicide case in Calgary, to be sent to go before the courts before an investigation is complete. Sure, small bits and pieces always pop up and the Crown will send detectives to quash possible alternate theories... It just doesn't ring true that they would risk an acquittal on sloppy investigating. Once a case is sent to the Crown, for the most part, LE have completed their job.

 

[stan laurel]

Fair enough.

The question of an accomplice is just as troubling for me...

I have never known a homicide case in Calgary, to be sent to go before the courts before an investigation is complete. Sure, small bits and pieces always pop up and the Crown will send detectives to quash possible alternate theories... It just doesn't ring true that they would risk an acquittal on sloppy investigating. Once a case is sent to the Crown, for the most part, LE have completed their job.

I asked a question many pages ago about,, once an arrest an charge has been made, police don't have to disclose anything more about the investigation? to which someone relied as this being correct. accomplice can fall into many categories too, but I'm too tired to post just now, maybe in a bit after a nap.

 

[news.talk]

I personally don't subscribe to this theory but including the child, makes it so unpalatable that we dismiss it as not being likely. That would be the beauty of such an ugly plan .If they'd disappeared alone, there would be speculation that they'd run off.

See, that is where I see the accused stepping in... I believe that he thought that this scenario would be a perfect opportunity. What he didn't count on, was NO being there that evening. Without his presence, he very well could have crafted a perfect murder. I believe that it was NO that caused his plan to go haywire and that is why there was evidence to point to a homicide... right down to the forensic evidence left behind. I have a feeling that they have solid evidence to point to pre-meditation that includes making it look like the couple simply left the country.

 

[news.talk]

I asked a question many pages ago about,, once an arrest an charge has been made, police don't have to disclose anything more about the investigation? to which someone relied as this being correct. accomplice can fall into many categories too, but I'm too tired to post just now, maybe in a bit after a nap.

LE are questioned rigorously on the stand regarding the investigation. They are taken step by step through their process and every detail is scrutinized by Defense Council. This would include any subsequent investigation and discovery.