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

[greyshep]

I dont think they know definitively where the actual death occurred. I believe the chief medical examiner earlier in the trial said it was uncertain if they would have perished from their wounds in the home.

Found this in an earlier article....

Brooks-Lim also examined the Liknes house and said it was difficult to say if the couple and their grandson had died there. She said pools of blood in the home matched the three, but it would depend on the kind of injuries as to whether they were fatal.

"They may have still have been alive."

[FlamesAddiction]

So basically the bloodletting evidence wasn't large enough to guarantee death at the scene.

[bigtmac19]

The details are horrifying, that poor little boy, it was horrible for all of them, but I just can't get out of my head the terror he must have experienced. It says several areas of "active bleeding" were found in the house, as if he would drag them and then leave them for a while and drag them again. Nathan's handprint at knee level on the closet door, swiping downward.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by bigtmac19

The details are horrifying, that poor little boy, it was horrible for all of them, but I just can't get out of my head the terror he must have experienced. It says several areas of "active bleeding" were found in the house, as if he would drag them and then leave them for a while and drag them again. Nathan's handprint at knee level on the closet door, swiping downward.

Do what I do, go with the assumption the hand print was just a transfer while moving the body, and that he was already gone.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

So basically the bloodletting evidence wasn't large enough to guarantee death at the scene.

Yeah it would be hard to say, since there was the clean up in the kitchen you don't really know what that looked like either.

[Peanut]

I hate everything about Douglas Garland and I hate everything about all the horrible details being splashed across the media. Even trying to avoid it (because I just find it way too upsetting), the headlines on CBC and elsewhere are devastating.

What an awful, unspeakable tragedy. I'm not religious but I hope Nathan and his grandparents are in a better place.

[Peanut]

And it sounds to me like he was hiding in the closet. Jesus.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Peanut

And it sounds to me like he was hiding in the closet. Jesus.

I don't think so, the blood from all 3 was either on or near the bed. It doesn't sound like they had much time at all to know what was going on. There were also no signs of a struggle in the spare room where Kathy and Nathan were. In the master there was a TV on the ground, but that was it really.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Luder

Garland probably panicked when he discovered that the little boy was there, and I bet the grandparents fought back even harder trying to protect him (Garland was probably expecting it to be easy)

That was my first thought as well, but the more evidence comes out, with all the torture research and tools he had, and now with the blood patterns, I'm starting to think that it was like a bonus to him that he got to kill his grandkid and wife in front of Alvin. And now for extra torture to the family, he's going through a trial instead of pleading guilty.

[Otto-matic]

NSFW!

Nancy Hixt ‏@NancyHixt 56m56 minutes ago
More
Arns said evidence in spare room shows Nathan O'Brien was "actively bleeding" #Garland

Nancy Hixt ‏@NancyHixt 19m19 minutes ago
More
"there were three main areas" that had the most blood Arns said-adds 'there was a significant amount throughout" #Garland

Ina Sidhu ‏@CTVInaSidhu 57m57 minutes ago
More
Arns says - stains on the bed of spare bedroom consistent with Nathan actively bleeding on the bed #garland

My heart sank when this tweet came out.

[pylon]

I can't understand how people can read stuff like this, and still believe the death penalty is inhumane. Garland has forfeited his right to live based on what he did. Pure evil, and there is absolutely zero reason to waste one red cent on this guy keeping him alive.

[Peanut]

And the Mom coming back to pick up her little boy that morning and finding this scene. And now having to sit through this trial. Omg. I don't know how she manages to keep breathing, honestly. I can't even imagine it.

[Northendzone]

I wonder if they prepped Nathan's parents in advance about this evidence and the conclusions

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I wonder if they prepped Nathan's parents in advance about this evidence and the conclusions

I would assume that someone sat down with them and told them what was going to be shown or presented, to not do that and have them sit there would be monstrous, especially since they will be the ones presenting victim impact statements if a guilty verdict is reached.

(Right lawyers that reside here?)

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I would assume that someone sat down with them and told them what was going to be shown or presented, to not do that and have them sit there would be monstrous, especially since they will be the ones presenting victim impact statements if a guilty verdict is reached.

(Right lawyers that reside here?)

I was about to ask if anyone saw whether Nathan's dad was in the courtroom during the trial.

Reason being, it would be effective to start with the mom as the first witness and then end with the dad as the last witness. That being said, its not like the Crown should be pulling at the jurors' emotions here, the evidence speaks for itself.

The general idea is a witness shouldn't watch the trial proceedings or read the news about them in case that taints their evidence, and often the court will give an order excluding them from sitting in before they testify. I suppose there could be a different consideration for the kind of evidence the dad could give, and perhaps his only real evidence would be for dramatic effect which should be avoided, but I wonder who the last two witnesses will be.

You always want to end your case on a strong note, so given the testimony to date I expect the last witness to provide something of impact.

It would be a no-no for the Crown or the Police to give evidence to the family in advance, from my understanding. The Mbates' of the world would know more however.

[greyshep]

Originally Posted by Delgar

I was about to ask if anyone saw whether Nathan's dad was in the courtroom during the trial.

Reason being, it would be effective to start with the mom as the first witness and then end with the dad as the last witness. That being said, its not like the Crown should be pulling at the jurors' emotions here, the evidence speaks for itself.

The general idea is a witness shouldn't watch the trial proceedings or read the news about them in case that taints their evidence, and often the court will give an order excluding them from sitting in before they testify. I suppose there could be a different consideration for the kind of evidence the dad could give, and perhaps his only real evidence would be for dramatic effect which should be avoided, but I wonder who the last two witnesses will be.

You always want to end your case on a strong note, so given the testimony to date I expect the last witness to provide something of impact.

It would be a no-no for the Crown or the Police to give evidence to the family in advance, from my understanding. The Mbates' of the world would know more however.

I dont think the father would really be a witness in this case. The only thing I think he was involved with was the phone call his wife made to him from the scene when she arrived.

I would think he would be more likely employed as a victim impact statement as the Captain mentioned above.

I sure hope the family was given a preview into the details that have come out in this trial as well. I dont know what the legalities of that are either.

[bigtmac19]

I don't know how she sits through it no matter what she's been told, other than to represent her son.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by pylon

I can't understand how people can read stuff like this, and still believe the death penalty is inhumane. Garland has forfeited his right to live based on what he did. Pure evil, and there is absolutely zero reason to waste one red cent on this guy keeping him alive.

Not having the death penalty is to save the lives of the wrongly convicted not the guilty. It's also cheaper to house them in prison then go through the legal process of applying the death penalty.

[Northendzone]

To me Nathan's dad should be given the opportunity to escort garland while the regular guards make a wrong turn down a hallway.....and then get locked behind a door for about 10 minutes

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by GGG

Not having the death penalty is to save the lives of the wrongly convicted not the guilty. It's also cheaper to house them in prison then go through the legal process of applying the death penalty.

Also, being the executioner, be it a gun or chemical execution, has to take a psychological toll. I'm no bleeding heart but I would not want to be the guy putting someone to death.