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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
news.talk said:
[veer]

verb*(used*without*object)

to*change*direction*or*turn*about*or*aside;shift,*turn,*or*change*from*one*course,position,*inclination,*etc.,*to*another:

-----
The bottom line is that convictions are being upheld, and the policies of our public institutions are being monitored for misapplication. Additionally, there is a reason for Defense Council.

While I cannot confirm through MSM links that the CPS has stopped using this technique, I did ask a friend who works as a Detective and was told that their policies have changed to reflect the ruling.
Click to expand...

That's encouraging for sure, but still, there is no proof that this technique is absolutely not used by LE anymore. The public definitely would like to hear that things like this do not go on with their trusted LE, however, no one knows what goes on in the interrogation room but the people in it.

(PS...thank you for the definitions you have posted for me...I do happen to understand what 'veer' means, but I appreciate your guidance :) "Veer" in no way suggests that something has stopped. I can veer off the my trip on the road because I've been detoured by the authorities, however, I still have the option of veering back onto that path should it be to my advantage or beneficial to me, especially if no one is looking. So, the very tactful and diplomatic remarks made by LE regarding this particular ruling are just that. They mean absolutely nothing to me whatsoever. There are many, many people in positions of power that 'bend' the rules and abuse that position of power. JMO
 
otto said:
As far as I can understand of the Calgary case where Judge Mike Dinkel, in May 2011, accused a detective of questioning a suspect using Reid Techniques, it seems to be about a woman that ran a daycare in her home ... and where a child in her care suffered a head injury and then died. If not the adult in charge, who is responsible?

It's a sad day when a suspect wriggles out of suffering the consequences of actions by complaining that during 8 hours of questioning she said she didn't want to answer questions, but at the same time she did not choose to remain silent. I have no sympathy for a woman that allows a child to be killed during her watch.
Click to expand...

Perhaps she shouldn't have been the one charged with the crime in the first place. Apparently, there was a bit of a tirade by one police officer using some pretty strong-armed tactics This is not WWII... and neither witnesses or suspects should be subjected to obvious badgering, coercion and bullying, ESPECIALLY by our 'friends'...isn't that what school children are being taught...the Police are your Friends. Hmmm. Probably most are, but there are some, that definitely are not. JMO
 
Tinkerbel1 said:
That's encouraging for sure, but still, there is no proof that this technique is absolutely not used by LE anymore. The public definitely would like to hear that things like this do not go on with their trusted LE, however, no one knows what goes on in the interrogation room but the people in it.
Click to expand...
<rsbm>

Just as that woman's interrogation was on tape, I would imagine any interrogation of DG will be available also. It's SOP and is for the protection of both parties.

ETA: Then there's this guy caught on candid camera, LOL:

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/08/01/man-admits-to-punching-cop-during-taped-interrogation

The defendant turned directly towards the camera and said "can you send me someone more intelligent than this one here? I don't like him, I won't talk to this guy. Bring me back to my cell, bring me a girl, I feel like chatting with a girl."

He then threatens the policeman and hits him with his right fist.
Click to expand...

I don't think these guys were friends ;)
 
sillybilly said:
<rsbm>

Just as that woman's interrogation was on tape, I would imagine any interrogation of DG will be available also. It's SOP and is for the protection of both parties.
Click to expand...
Precisely.

There is also a simple solution that any Defense Lawyer will adamantly agree on - Keep your mouth shut. The Miranda rule in the US is not applicable in Canada. A suspect can be held up to six hours without counsel. The Supreme Court upheld this fact in 2010:


The court said police cannot force a suspect to participate in an interrogation, but that the suspect does not have the right to have a lawyer there if they chose to participate in the interrogation.

"The police are not empowered by the common law or by statute, and still less by our Constitution, to prevent or undermine the effective exercise by detainees of either their right to silence or their right to counsel, or to compel them against their clearly expressed wishes to participate in interrogations until confession," the court stated.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/no-right-to-lawyer-during-questioning-scc-rules-1.561357

The question of interogation techniques is moot if you simply say nothing and wait to be charged.
 
Tinkerbel1 said:
Perhaps she shouldn't have been the one charged with the crime in the first place. Apparently, there was a bit of a tirade by one police officer using some pretty strong-armed tactics This is not WWII... and neither witnesses or suspects should be subjected to obvious badgering, coercion and bullying, ESPECIALLY by our 'friends'...isn't that what school children are being taught...the Police are your Friends. Hmmm. Probably most are, but there are some, that definitely are not. JMO
Click to expand...
They are not paid to be your friend. They are paid to serve and protect. If you have been detained for questioning regarding a crime, their job is not to make YOUR life easier. There job is to solve the crime. Know your rights and stay on the right side of the law.

If it was your loved one missing or murdered, you would be taking a very different stance.
 
This will be short on specifics out of necessity. I get involved in stuff ;) and have personal knowledge/experience in a case where a person was handcuffed and assaulted by LE during an interrogation (a division that was discussed upthread). A complaint was made and I told the investigating officers "you can bet your boots the tape won't exist". Guess what? No tape.

Another occasion, an innocent person phoned me for advice and while on the phone VPD arrived at their door. LE kept telling the person to hang up the phone and I kept yelling "don't hang up". The person held on, LE left and laughingly called out Goodnite **** to me as they left. Ended up being a non-event but I suspect it could have turned out differently had the person hung up the phone.

Lots of good guys and some bad apples .. I have great respect for the good guys. I have a lot more stories about them :biggrin:
 
sillybilly said:
This will be short on specifics out of necessity. I get involved in stuff ;) and have personal knowledge/experience in a case where a person was handcuffed and assaulted by LE during an interrogation (a division that was discussed upthread). A complaint was made and I told the investigating officers "you can bet your boots the tape won't exist". Guess what? No tape.

Another occasion, an innocent person phoned me for advice and while on the phone VPD arrived at their door. LE kept telling the person to hang up the phone and I kept yelling "don't hang up". The person held on, LE left and laughingly called out Goodnite **** to me as they left. Ended up being a non-event but I suspect it could have turned out differently had the person hung up the phone.

Lots of good guys and some bad apples .. I have great respect for the good guys.
Click to expand...
Just as there is in any profession. Police officers deal with the most brutal of offenders and offenses. They are human, and as such so my do the best they can under the circumstances. We cannot expect them to be super-human or robotic and unsympathetic. The reason there are so many checks and balances, ongoing training, mandatory counseling and psychiatric assessments and coming into force - lapel cameras, is to support our officers to do their jobs properly and within the law.
 
Approx 70,000 cops in Canada ... the size of a small city. When I see/hear the horror and crap they have to put up with on a daily basis, I'm surprised there aren't more injustices than the few we hear about.

Not LE, but just tonite in Ferguson, Missouri ... fire fighters having to let a building burn because of the shots being fired around them by thugs who probably don't even know Michael Brown. There are folks who put their lives on the line for us every day and get little thanks while their spouses or kids are home wondering if hubby or daddy will come home tonite.
 
sillybilly said:
Approx 70,000 cops in Canada ... the size of a small city. When I see/hear the horror and crap they have to put up with on a daily basis, I'm surprised there aren't more injustices than the few we hear about.

Not LE, but just tonite in Ferguson, Missouri ... fire fighters having to let a building burn because of the shots being fired around them by thugs who probably don't even know Michael Brown. There are folks who put their lives on the line for us every day and get little thanks while their spouses or kids are home wondering if hubby or daddy will come home tonite.
Click to expand...
I have been following the protests on TV and Twitter and I am just shaking my head in disbelief. Even when the law is followed, the processes of inquiries and court proceedures are undertaken, it still leads to more violence. To be a police officer during this madness would be horrible. So many of them are being unfairly targeted and harmed for simply doing their jobs. It is unacceptable.
 
Hmm, no I don't think that is what you said. There has never been any talk of or indication that a sexual assault was also involved in this case, and so even if murdered and abducted, as otto, sillybilly and myself have indicated, the new law would still not apply in this case since this case is missing the sexual assault component, no matter what our personal beliefs might be regarding the abduction possibility.

news.talk said:
It would only factor in if a suspect was eligible based on when it comes into force and *if* one or more of the victims were abducted prior to the murder - which I personally don't believe was the case.
Click to expand...

otto said:
We haven't heard about an abduction or a sexual assault, and without all three criminal acts against one of the three victims, this proposed law (amongst many) would not apply.
Click to expand...

news.talk said:
Isn't that what I said?
Click to expand...
 
If a murder was not planned and would be deemed to be a second degree murder, wouldn't the charge become 'first degree murder' if it also involved an abduction? And since DG's charge IRT NO's murder is 'second degree murder', then LE must believe that NO was murdered in the home, otherwise they would have charged him with 3 'first degree' murder charges.

If the neighbourhood 'crime stat' saying there were '2' homicides in Parkhill in June is correct, which it should be correct since it is now 5 months later and should have been corrected if it was in error, (and I'm sure it has been pointed out to the keepers of the stats many times, and considering this is a high profile case, why would they leave such a large error like that just sitting there for 5 months, I don't care how busy they may feel they are, but I'm not buying it that it was clerical error and can't be fixed), and if any weight is given to the original AA which stated there was a missing boy and his grandfather, then I wonder if LE believe AL was taken against his will while the other 2 were murdered at Parkhill?

231. (1) Murder is first degree murder or second degree murder.

(2) Murder is first degree murder when it is planned and deliberate.

...

5) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder in respect of a person when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under one of the following sections:

...

(e) section 279 (kidnapping and forcible confinement); or

...

(7) All murder that is not first degree murder is second degree murder.
Click to expand...
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-116.html#docCont

http://crimemap.calgarypolice.ca/content/DisclaimerPage.aspx
 
Tinkerbel1 said:
Perhaps she shouldn't have been the one charged with the crime in the first place. Apparently, there was a bit of a tirade by one police officer using some pretty strong-armed tactics This is not WWII... and neither witnesses or suspects should be subjected to obvious badgering, coercion and bullying, ESPECIALLY by our 'friends'...isn't that what school children are being taught...the Police are your Friends. Hmmm. Probably most are, but there are some, that definitely are not. JMO
Click to expand...

One female detective was accused of using Reid Tactics. That officer disagreed. Mike Dinkel has a different opinion. As a result, a child that suffered a head injury causing death at a home daycare is swept under the rug.

Either way, Douglas Garland stands accused of a triple murder, and I doubt that legal trickery will get him out of it.
 
news.talk said:
Precisely.

There is also a simple solution that any Defense Lawyer will adamantly agree on - Keep your mouth shut. The Miranda rule in the US is not applicable in Canada. A suspect can be held up to six hours without counsel. The Supreme Court upheld this fact in 2010:


The court said police cannot force a suspect to participate in an interrogation, but that the suspect does not have the right to have a lawyer there if they chose to participate in the interrogation.

"The police are not empowered by the common law or by statute, and still less by our Constitution, to prevent or undermine the effective exercise by detainees of either their right to silence or their right to counsel, or to compel them against their clearly expressed wishes to participate in interrogations until confession," the court stated.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/no-right-to-lawyer-during-questioning-scc-rules-1.561357

The question of interogation techniques is moot if you simply say nothing and wait to be charged.
Click to expand...

What happens in the US is not applicable in Canada or any other country. What happens in Canada is common in many countries.
 
news.talk said:
They are not paid to be your friend. They are paid to serve and protect. If you have been detained for questioning regarding a crime, their job is not to make YOUR life easier. There job is to solve the crime. Know your rights and stay on the right side of the law.

If it was your loved one missing or murdered, you would be taking a very different stance.
Click to expand...


If this is the case, then perhaps school children shouldn't be taught this. Or, they should add a disclaimer...."the Police are your friends...except if you commit a crime"...who knows, maybe that would go a long way to having future generations growing up with a clearer understanding of why you shouldn't commit crime.

I have not committed a crime. If I did, I wouldn't expect LE to make my life easier, and I would fully expect to be held to the letter of the law. However, I certainly wouldn't expect coercion, harassment, dishonesty or abuse either. And...before you go assuming that I'm saying LE abuses people, etc. as par for the course, that is not what I'm saying at all. I'm speaking in general terms. We've all heard of this happening. I'm hoping that it's not happening in this country, however, I'm sure it is...somewhere.

No, I wouldn't be taking a different stance, and since you don't know me, its a little presumptuous of you to make this statement. I have respect for ALL human beings, no matter the actions. We've discussed this one before, many threads ago. I'm all about compassion and forgiveness. I may have a reaction like everyone else to situations, but I don't wish anything bad for anyone....even the murderers. Not forgiving, is like drinking poison and expecting the other guy to die...it doesn't do anything for anyone. Sorry, that's just how I'm wired.
 
deugirtni said:
If a murder was not planned and would be deemed to be a second degree murder, wouldn't the charge become 'first degree murder' if it also involved an abduction? And since DG's charge IRT NO's murder is 'second degree murder', then LE must believe that NO was murdered in the home, otherwise they would have charged him with 3 'first degree' murder charges.

If the neighbourhood 'crime stat' saying there were '2' homicides in Parkhill in June is correct, which it should be correct since it is now 5 months later and should have been corrected if it was in error, (and I'm sure it has been pointed out to the keepers of the stats many times, and considering this is a high profile case, why would they leave such a large error like that just sitting there for 5 months, I don't care how busy they may feel they are, but I'm not buying it that it was clerical error and can't be fixed), and if any weight is given to the original AA which stated there was a missing boy and his grandfather, then I wonder if LE believe AL was taken against his will while the other 2 were murdered at Parkhill?


http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-116.html#docCont

http://crimemap.calgarypolice.ca/content/DisclaimerPage.aspx
Click to expand...

What you say makes very much sense about the 2nd degree charge and abduction. I had thought maybe it was KL and AL at Parkhill and maybe NO was an after thought/dilemma crime :( But what you say sounds more like what probably happened, so dreadful no matter which way it went.

If AL reluctantly went with DG after the crimes, what horror. There was mention of a possible 3rd crime scene, so AL might've been taken there. I wonder where that ended up being...
 
deugirtni said:
If a murder was not planned and would be deemed to be a second degree murder, wouldn't the charge become 'first degree murder' if it also involved an abduction? And since DG's charge IRT NO's murder is 'second degree murder', then LE must believe that NO was murdered in the home, otherwise they would have charged him with 3 'first degree' murder charges.

If the neighbourhood 'crime stat' saying there were '2' homicides in Parkhill in June is correct, which it should be correct since it is now 5 months later and should have been corrected if it was in error, (and I'm sure it has been pointed out to the keepers of the stats many times, and considering this is a high profile case, why would they leave such a large error like that just sitting there for 5 months, I don't care how busy they may feel they are, but I'm not buying it that it was clerical error and can't be fixed), and if any weight is given to the original AA which stated there was a missing boy and his grandfather, then I wonder if LE believe AL was taken against his will while the other 2 were murdered at Parkhill?


http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-116.html#docCont

http://crimemap.calgarypolice.ca/content/DisclaimerPage.aspx
Click to expand...

That does jive with the mention of a possible passenger early in the truck picture release information, and fits for those who think it is impossible to carry a 200lb body to a vehicle.

In your theory, KL is the second victim in the home, therefore LE would have some sort of evidence indicating possible premeditation. Given that the primary relationship is between DG and AL, it's not a stretch to think there would be evidence of planning for AL as well.

The 2 on the site map may only indicate what they can prove. It's the same for the 2nd degree murder charge. If there is no proof of death location anywhere for NO, but enough found somewhere to indicate death, then proving he was abducted first would be near impossible. Without any evidence of planning for NO, they may have had no choice but to go to 2nd degree.
 
Tinkerbel1 said:
If this is the case, then perhaps school children shouldn't be taught this. Or, they should add a disclaimer...."the Police are your friends...except if you commit a crime"...who knows, maybe that would go a long way to having future generations growing up with a clearer understanding of why you shouldn't commit crime.

I have not committed a crime. If I did, I wouldn't expect LE to make my life easier, and I would fully expect to be held to the letter of the law. However, I certainly wouldn't expect coercion, harassment, dishonesty or abuse either. And...before you go assuming that I'm saying LE abuses people, etc. as par for the course, that is not what I'm saying at all. I'm speaking in general terms. We've all heard of this happening. I'm hoping that it's not happening in this country, however, I'm sure it is...somewhere.

No, I wouldn't be taking a different stance, and since you don't know me, its a little presumptuous of you to make this statement. I have respect for ALL human beings, no matter the actions. We've discussed this one before, many threads ago. I'm all about compassion and forgiveness. I may have a reaction like everyone else to situations, but I don't wish anything bad for anyone....even the murderers. Not forgiving, is like drinking poison and expecting the other guy to die...it doesn't do anything for anyone. Sorry, that's just how I'm wired.
Click to expand...
Until you have been intimately affected by a violent crime, had to painfully sit through the arduous process of an investigation, court and sentencing, you truly have no idea how you would react. It is very noble, yet naive to think that you would be able to stay true to a Pollyanna premise of compassion and love for all, even for someone that slaughtered your loved one, but the fact is, you truly do not know how you will react.

Our justice system is flawed and far from perfect, but it is our responsibility as citizens, to hold our elected officials and public servants accountable. It's again naive and frankly, irresponsible, to sit back and armchair quarterback a system that you have ultimately rubberstamped. If you are worried about how out LE and courts treat murderers and rapists, then by all means, meet with your Councilman or Police Chief and ask how you can get involved as a constituent to work towards a change in policy. Sit in court and watch how trials are conducted, and if you have a concern, make an appointment to speak with the Crown. Pontificating on a forum and questioning policy and decisions is pointless. Be the change you want to see in the world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 153 more.
Total: 3,545 (members: 154, guests: 3,391)

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
3,391
Total visitors
3,545
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,270
Messages
17,966,479
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top