Douglas Garland Trial - Guilty- 1st degree- 3 counts / 75 years no parole.

[flylock shox]

At a minimum the internet searches are relevant to premeditation on the murder 1 charges. If the jury were to find he committed the killings, it would then have to classify the homicides with regard to the degree of planning and intent involved.

It's both prejudicial and relevant. The jury will no doubt be - and likely has been - warned about the limited use to which this evidence can be put.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

At a minimum the internet searches are relevant to premeditation on the murder 1 charges. If the jury were to find he committed the killings, it would then have to classify the homicides with regard to the degree of planning and intent involved.

It's both prejudicial and relevant. The jury will no doubt be - and likely has been - warned about the limited use to which this evidence can be put.

I get that. And if someone searches for techniques regarding body disposal, obviously that is relevant.

But when they are talking about his pornesqe habits and gore photos I guess I ponder the relevance of that.

[me_dennis]

It sounds like the Defense is trying to argue that the victims likely would've died at the Liknes' home, since there is no evidence placing Garland at the Liknes' home.

From the opening statements, it sounded like there was a lot of evidence against Garland, but as the trial goes on, it all sounds circumstantial, and there's nothing placing Garland at the scene of the crime, nor any DNA from the victims at Garland's farm.

It would be incredibly tough to be on the jury on this trial.

[REDVAN]

Originally Posted by me_dennis

It sounds like the Defense is trying to argue that the victims likely would've died at the Liknes' home, since there is no evidence placing Garland at the Liknes' home.

From the opening statements, it sounded like there was a lot of evidence against Garland, but as the trial goes on, it all sounds circumstantial, and there's nothing placing Garland at the scene of the crime, nor any DNA from the victims at Garland's farm.

It would be incredibly tough to be on the jury on this trial.

I thought the victim's DNA was found at the farm? What about the meat hooks etc?

[Slava]

Turns out I know someone on the jury (kind of a friend of a friend situation). Apparently he's handling it well, under the circumstances. I really feel for him though because it seems like a really disturbing case, and it would be hard to hear and see the evidence without thinking of the poor little boy.

[me_dennis]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

I thought the victim's DNA was found at the farm? What about the meat hooks etc?

I think from the witness testimony, it was determined that the bone/teeth in the burn barrel were not human, and there was also a question of whether or not the burn barrel contents were tampered with, as the contents were not guarded.

I remember reading from the twitter feeds that the DNA on the farm did not belong to any of the victims. I could be wrong though.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by me_dennis

I think from the witness testimony, it was determined that the bone/teeth in the burn barrel were not human, and there was also a question of whether or not the burn barrel contents were tampered with, as the contents were not guarded.

I remember reading from the twitter feeds that the DNA on the farm did not belong to any of the victims. I could be wrong though.

IIRC there was DNA matching the victims on knives and on meathooks, also they found a bottle of that DNA destroying solvent on the site as well.

[me_dennis]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ay-9-1.3953278

Earlier on Thursday, Garland's lawyer Kim Ross cross-examined lead forensic investigator Const. Ian Oxten, who testified that none of the accused's fingerprints or DNA was ever found in the Liknes' home.

Oxton spent Tuesday and Wednesday testifying as a witness for the prosecution. He confirmed to Ross that no DNA from the missing family members was found on any of the contents of a black duffel bag — two sets of handcuffs, a large knife and a leather baton — or child-size handcuffs that were seized from the Garland farm.

In their opening statement, prosecutors told jurors DNA from the missing family members was found on a saw and two meat hooks on the farm property where Garland lived with his parents.

The exhibits Oxton collected were sent to labs for further testing. Other witnesses will give evidence about DNA results later in the trial.

i guess the witness testimony regarding the meat hooks and saw maybe hasn't been presented yet in the trial. let's hope that the witnesses are thorough and didn't miss anything

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by me_dennis

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ay-9-1.3953278

To me it sounds like Garland was pretty well prepared, it probably wouldn't take much to do his research and show up at the house fully clothed and drugged and not leave finger prints or enough DNA evidence to be conclusive.

The damning evidence is the blood and DNA on the tools on the farm.

Right now Garland certainly has the motive against him, his hard drive is pretty tough evidence as well. Having a murder kit doesn't help, nor some evidence that does link the family to being on the farm.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by me_dennis

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ay-9-1.3953278



i guess the witness testimony regarding the meat hooks and saw maybe hasn't been presented yet in the trial. let's hope that the witnesses are thorough and didn't miss anything

I've been following the trial and in the opening statement it was mentioned that their DNA was found but so far none of the witnesses have gotten into the results of DNA testing. There have been a few CPS officers that have said DNA was recovered from various items but no results thus far.

[Clarkey]

Garland seems like a Steven Avery type guy.

[calgaryblood]

What I don't get about Garland is he's obviously a very smart man, went to great lengths to study his victims and research ways not to get caught but then drives his old beat up bright green truck in a pretty good neighborhood where it'll stick out like a sore thumb?

His truck might not be noticed in Penbrooke maybe but in that neighborhood did he really think someone wouldn't have noticed/no security cameras? I wonder if he'd ever have been caught if he just had decided to rent a truck instead for the day.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

What I don't get about Garland is he's obviously a very smart man, went to great lengths to study his victims and research ways not to get caught but then drives his old beat up bright green truck in a pretty good neighborhood where it'll stick out like a sore thumb?

His truck might not be noticed in Penbrooke maybe but in that neighborhood did he really think someone wouldn't have noticed/no security cameras? I wonder if he'd ever have been caught if he just had decided to rent a truck instead for the day.

Yeah pretty dumb using his own vehicle but it's parkhill, not across the river in elbow park or mount royal, and this is Calgary, it's full of old pickups.

Quick look in google maps shows a lot of beaters near their house.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.02021...7i13312!8i6656

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by Clarkey

Garland seems like a Steven Avery type guy.

Innocent?

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Innocent?

Not to derail but I'm not sure Avery is innocent. He just never should have been found guilty due to the obvious evidence tampering and what not. I think a clean police force likely makes a case against him and a good one. The corrupt police force and DA's office with an axe to grind seemingly planted and tampered with evidence etc. to turn it into a slam dunk.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Slava

Turns out I know someone on the jury (kind of a friend of a friend situation). Apparently he's handling it well, under the circumstances. I really feel for him though because it seems like a really disturbing case, and it would be hard to hear and see the evidence without thinking of the poor little boy.

What type of support or post trial counselling is available to jurors I wonder?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

What type of support or post trial counselling is available to jurors I wonder?

I don't know the specifics but there is counselling and support available and the judge has also mentioned that if the jurors need to take breaks at times that is fine. Obviously he can't discuss the case and such at this point!

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

What I don't get about Garland is he's obviously a very smart man, went to great lengths to study his victims and research ways not to get caught but then drives his old beat up bright green truck in a pretty good neighborhood where it'll stick out like a sore thumb?

His truck might not be noticed in Penbrooke maybe but in that neighborhood did he really think someone wouldn't have noticed/no security cameras? I wonder if he'd ever have been caught if he just had decided to rent a truck instead for the day.

Well according to what they have been talking about today, he kept the shoe box for the shoes he wore to the Liknes house. Obviously he didn't think of everything to cover his tracks. (If he did it).

[greyshep]

Originally Posted by hockeyguy15

well according to what they have been talking about today, he kept the shoe box for the shoes he wore to the liknes house. Obviously he didn't think of everything to cover his tracks. (if he did it).

lol

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by greyshep

lol

Agreed, but some people are sticklers.