Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #20

Discussion in '2010's Missing' started by sillybilly, Jul 3, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, Garland's sister has three children and one of the six Liknes children lives with her - a son from Alvin's first marriage. He lives with a woman and her three children, and I'm pretty sure he and / or his parents borrowed money from Garland's sister for the Mexico retirement condo. I'm also doubtful that her name is on title, but it should be if she invested.

    With Liknes omitting to include her name on the property title and then declaring bankruptcy, what recourse did Garland's sister have to see repayment of the loan / investment ... even though the 'investment' was made through her live-in boyfriend and common-law-husband's parents (Alvin Liknes),

    How was Garland's sister protected in the Mexico condo financial deal / bankruptcy loan?
     
  2. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Garland's sister was never buying a condo in Mexico. Liknes and his wife were buying a condo near his twin brother. Was it maybe the elderly parents who pitched in for the condo? I remember something about Garland money being used for the Liknes retirement fund and Mexico condo - and that makes no sense.

    There's no good reason for Garland money to be used for Liknes' retirement lifestyle. If Garland money was used either through parents or sister, I can see Douglas Garland being really angry that his family was being taken advantage of after his belief that he was the first victim (patent).
     
  3. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I've been looking for a link about the Mexico condo, and who paid for it. All I can find are links to this site where I posted that Garland's parents put money into the condo. I believe the couple are in their 80s - hardly the 'suntanning on the beach' time of life.

    That could be one aspect of intertwined family finances that didn't sit well with Garland.
     
  4. LoisLane

    LoisLane New Member

    Messages:
    2,050
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Maybe DG's parents owned the Mexico condo originally and they transferred it to PG. Possibly PG added her common-law partner AL to the title. Maybe there was an arrangement that KL and AL would co-own or rent from them or just buy it outright.

    FWIW, PG and AL are no longer together.
     
  5. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All possible, but not completely the same as funds from the elderly Garland couple being provided to the Liknes couple to purchase the Mexico condo. The only above-board way (in my opinion) to protect that Garland money is to add one of the Garland names to the property title - but I really doubt that happened. If it was a loan, wouldn't the bankruptcy declaration absolve Liknes of the responsibility for repayment?
     
  6. kdgdid

    kdgdid Member

    Messages:
    803
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Not necessarily because Mexico would have different laws.
    It is also possible that A and KL originally owned the property but due to the bankruptcy put it in A and P's name.
     
  7. LoisLane

    LoisLane New Member

    Messages:
    2,050
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I do not recall these details you mention of the elderly Garland's funding KL and AL. Where did that come from?

    Also, how does the bankruptcy tie into the funds from the sale of their home? Or was the sale first and bankruptcy second? And if so, how did they account for the money from the sale of the home? Maybe that went to the Garlands under the table in exchange for the condo in Mexico?

    I'm confused.
     
  8. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Going purely from memory, but what I recall we discussed here months ago is that in order for Liknes to purchase property in Mexico, he had to have a company in Mexico with a minimum of something like 3 employees. I'm pretty sure that the Garland name was never on the Mexico property that was purchased by Liknes using some Garland money ... but we'll have to wait for the trial to know for sure. If I'm right, I see that as a tipping point for D. Garland.

    I wonder if the Liknes couple promoted the Mexico condo as a money making 'time-share' investment, and on that basis asked family and friends to help pay for it.

    "Alvin and Kathryn Liknes hold an estate sale at their house. Signs on the front door say, “come on in!” Dozens of people cycle in and out of the home over weekend. Neighbours who chatted with the couple say they were talking about ‘downsizing’ and moving to Mexico. Cherri Hodgins, a friend of Kathryn Liknes, said the couple bought a condo there and had been planning to move for several months."

    see post #6 here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...es-53-Nathan-O-Brien-5-Calgary-30-June-2014-2
     
  9. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113

    The house was sold in Dec 2013. Bankruptcy was declared six months later on the weekend of the 'estate' sale, and at the same time the business office was emptied. I believe the info about the elderly Garlands providing money for the Mexico condo came from a CTV news video.

    The Garland's did not own a condo in Mexico.
    The Liknes couple had recently purchased a condo in Mexico.
     
  10. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In re-reading thread 2 of this discussion, I see that my position has not changed since July 2. Garland was arrested two weeks later.

    see post #25: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Nathan-O-Brien-5-Calgary-30-June-2014-2/page2

    "They sold the house in Calgary in Dec 2013 for a lowball price. They had owned the house for 17 years and still tripled their money. They bought a house in Edmonton (much cheaper). Alvin has a twin brother, an identical twin, that lives in Mazatlan, Mexico. It sounds like Alvin told people that they were moving North to Edmonton and Kathryn told people they had bought property (condo) in Mexico. In fact, they were going to live in Edmonton and hoped to visit Alvin's twin brother Allen in Mazatlan in about three months for an unspecified length of time. Parkhill, Calgary versus Edmonton? Isn't it no brainer ... Parkhill is nicer than every part of Edmonton?

    Why did they sell short to leave Calgary ... liquidate ... after a six month lease on the house they sold (which would be worth an extra 100k six months later). Did they want to make sure that nothing was in their names? Were they leaving town because it was dangerous? What was behind all the facades of oil, gas, mining, web, looking to purchase property, and marketing companies? Was anyone taken advantage of ... as in revenge?"
     
  11. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This article provides a good timeline:

    http://globalnews.ca/news/1445696/t...amily-nathan-obrien-alvin-and-kathryn-liknes/

    "The affidavit is from the day Jennifer O’Brien returned to her parents home to pick up her son from a sleepover. According to the affidavit, O’Brien called police and said there was “blood everywhere” and that she believed her mom, dad and son had been murdered.
    ...

    Officers noticed blood on the stairs leading up to second floor, including blood in both upstairs bedrooms. The document said there were drag marks in blood “consistent with a person(s) being dragged out the side door of the home and then north along the residences sidewalk.”

    “Officers also located a dumbbell with blood staining on it located in a corner of the garage and bloody footprints leading into the garage,” reads the report."

    http://globalnews.ca/news/2091393/p...y-murdered-within-1st-hours-of-investigation/
     
  12. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If a locally found dumbbell is the murder weapon, how is it pre-meditated murder for all three victims? The murder of witnesses would be first degree, but this could have started as a demand to settle a debt, and it got out of hand.
     
  13. Lalalacasbah

    Lalalacasbah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Good point but I'll throw some ideas out there…

    Do we even know if the dumbbell used was from the Liknes house or brought there? Maybe original plan/weapon didn't work at the last minute? Maybe there was two, the one he planned to use broke or something happened and the dumbell was a backup? Maybe Garland scouted the place out earlier, and maybe he thought he was smart to leave the weapon behind and look like part of the "home" so the murder weapon might never be "found".
     
  14. Lalalacasbah

    Lalalacasbah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    otto, I once pondered maybe vengeance/revenge maybe for his parents/family too if they were ripped off or wronged, but now I don't.

    My opinion is Garland is a psychopath. Killing Nathan was purely unnecessary even if he was a witness (I hope not) or if Garland wanted revenge, that's as brutal as it gets. Garland didn't care about his parents when he had a drug lab on their property, and if true that he burned human remains on their property, he didn't give a crap about them or the fact that they might be tied to such a heinous act and possibly incriminated themselves if anything was done on their property (sounds like it was).

    I think Garland's perverse taste for things illegal and seeing what he could get away with, his ego, arrogance, feeling of being unsuccessful in life and humiliation ("I'll show them") drove him to this crime. JMO.
     
  15. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The dumbbells can be seen in this photo (from the estate sale).
     

    Attached Files:

  16. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's all true, but he didn't choose a random victim. He chose Alvin and his wife for a specific reason, and that reason is very likely tied to money and Garland's perception that Alvin wronged him, his sister, and/or his parents.
     
  17. Lalalacasbah

    Lalalacasbah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ah yes, thank you. I couldn't remember, I'm quite foggy on the details as it's been a long time since I revisited this story. It still upsets me, so I have avoided it for a long time. With the trial coming up, it's hard not to come back as I'm emotionally invested on the outcome of all this.
     
  18. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's a long time to wait for details about what really happened and why.
     
  19. otto

    otto Verified Expert

    Messages:
    30,907
    Likes Received:
    21,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Perhaps it will come down to teeth.

    We know the victims, so their DNA is known. Even if the remains of the three victims were burned, the temperatures are not hot enough to destroy teeth. Teeth can be matched to known victims.

    It makes sense to try to exclude bone fragments and ash, but teeth evidence cannot be excluded.
     
  20. Coldpizza

    Coldpizza WS Administrator Staff Member Administrator Moderator

    Messages:
    19,768
    Likes Received:
    472
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Sensational murder trial of Douglas Garland will dominate Calgary court cases in 2017
    DECEMBER 28, 2016

    Garland is charged with first-degree murder in the June 30, 2014 deaths of little Nathan O’Brien, 5, and the boy’s grandparents, Alvin and Kathy Liknes.

    The trio disappeared from their Parkhill-area home that day and their bodies have never been found.

    Garland was arrested days after their disappearance after police scoured his parents’ acreage northeast of Calgary.

    His trial, beginning Jan. 16, is set to last five weeks, with veteran defence lawyers Kim Ross and Jim Lutz acting for him.

    http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/12/2...and-will-dominate-calgary-court-cases-in-2017
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice