Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Ivrnet

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-16-2017, 02:49 PM   #21
Canehdianman
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayswin View Post
This confuses me. Who was taking aerial footage and when did it become available to police? Like how does footage show 3 bodies face down in a field yet doesn't make it to the police in time to find the bodies?
saw an article that mentioned it was footage from an airplane for mapping purposes. Likely wasn't requested until too late.
Canehdianman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 02:50 PM   #22
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

This illustrates why I'm not a good person, and not a fair person at times, because my mind would have been pretty much made up after the first days testimony and I'd be willing to pull the switch myself if there was a death penalty.
__________________
Good Night America . . . Wherever you are
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Old 01-16-2017, 03:02 PM   #23
edslunch
First Line Centre
 
edslunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Exp:
Default Douglas Garland Trial

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyah View Post
I don't think I could do it. I don't think I could mentally handle hearing the testimony & seeing evidence. They must provide some kind of counselling service or therapy for jurors after cases like this?


There was a piece about juror counselling on the National last week. People get PTSD from some of these trials. IIRC Alberta is the only province that offers free counselling to all jurors, thankfully it's available in this case.
edslunch is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to edslunch For This Useful Post:
Old 01-16-2017, 03:03 PM   #24
MBates
Crash and Bang Winger
 
MBates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Are you deciding whether something bad happened or deciding whether this individual is responsible though? Not really the same question it would seem.
Technically in every case (unless facts are admitted) the jury is deciding all facts. For many facts the judge will say something like "you should have very little difficulty concluding that 'x' happened" in instructions, but also end with "ultimately it is up to you to decide".

This jury will have to decide if three people were killed since no bodies are found (again, unless the accused admits the deaths and therefore doesn't require that to be proven).

I suspect, however, that the question of whether this accused is responsible may be the question more likely argued by the defence.

Edit:

Bill Graveland detailing the evidence about how grandparents have not been heard from since disappearance, cell phones tried multiple times, condo in Mexico now being rented, no history of mental illness etc. All to deal with ruling out possibility the grandparents just took off with the child. It seems clear to me it is a live issue in this trial.

https://twitter.com/BillGraveland?re...Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Last edited by MBates; 01-16-2017 at 03:12 PM.
MBates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 03:09 PM   #25
OMG!WTF!
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edslunch View Post
There was a piece about juror counselling on the National last week. People get PTSD from some of these trials. IIRC Alberta is the only province that offers free counselling to all jurors, thankfully it's available in this case.
Read that too...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/jury-d...help-1.3931643
OMG!WTF! is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to OMG!WTF! For This Useful Post:
Old 01-16-2017, 03:15 PM   #26
icecube
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: compton
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
This illustrates why I'm not a good person, and not a fair person at times, because my mind would have been pretty much made up after the first days testimony and I'd be willing to pull the switch myself if there was a death penalty.
I don't even believe in the death penalty, and I'd be willing the pull the switch myself. That guy isn't human so it wouldn't faze me.
icecube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 05:45 PM   #27
JoseCuervo
Crash and Bang Winger
 
JoseCuervo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Renfrew
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayswin View Post
This confuses me. Who was taking aerial footage and when did it become available to police? Like how does footage show 3 bodies face down in a field yet doesn't make it to the police in time to find the bodies?
Various mapping planes are flying over Alberta on a pretty regular basis. The planes are usually working for various gov or industry projects used for project planning. It sounds like the police got extremely lucky with a plane flying high resolution photography over his property.
JoseCuervo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to JoseCuervo For This Useful Post:
Old 01-16-2017, 06:37 PM   #28
CaramonLS
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Exp:
Default

Why this is trial under a publication ban?

Also curious to see what cause the police had to search his property and what the timelines were. I'd be a little scared for anyone if all they needed to perform the search was an ominous photo of a green truck in the area of the abductions.

Last edited by CaramonLS; 01-16-2017 at 06:43 PM.
CaramonLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 07:37 PM   #29
REDVAN
Franchise Player
 
REDVAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS View Post
Why this is trial under a publication ban?

Also curious to see what cause the police had to search his property and what the timelines were. I'd be a little scared for anyone if all they needed to perform the search was an ominous photo of a green truck in the area of the abductions.
You'll have to attend the trial every day to find out, if there's a publication ban
__________________
REDVAN!
REDVAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 07:48 PM   #30
MattyC
Franchise Player
 
MattyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Cases like this are why I don't get involved with death penalty discussions. It's something that I'm just not sure where I stand on, because things like this happen.
__________________


Check out my comics Boris Got Out and Humanity Ltd. through my website! Also found on Facebook and Twitter!


www.badartcomics.com
MattyC is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MattyC For This Useful Post:
Old 01-16-2017, 07:50 PM   #31
CedarMeter
Powerplay Quarterback
 
CedarMeter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: DeWinton
Exp:
Default

The publication ban is now over because the trial started today. The gruesome details about the case are in every newspaper and news station. Horrific.
CedarMeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 08:02 PM   #32
MrDJZak
Farm Team Player
 
MrDJZak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Exp:
Default

50+ witnesses to be called by the prosecution in the next 5 weeks. Sounds like they, and the police, have this locked down tight.
MrDJZak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 08:10 PM   #33
Kjesse
First Line Centre
formerly Delgar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Exp:
Default

The Crown said in their opening statement that DNA of the child and grandfather were found on a saw on the farm, and of the grandmother, on a meat hook on the farm.

Add that to the airplane photos, the bloody scene at the house, and the burn barrel, and as long as the witnesses back all this up, which I would expect they do, its pretty clear what happened.

The Crown is being careful as they should, closing the door on any reasonable doubt the defence might argue. They do have to take those hail mary arguments away from the defence and so far, so good.

I have much sympathy for the grandparents being killed but its the murder of the child that really gets to me.
Kjesse is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Kjesse For This Useful Post:
Old 01-16-2017, 08:17 PM   #34
Hockeyguy15
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS View Post
Why this is trial under a publication ban?

Also curious to see what cause the police had to search his property and what the timelines were. I'd be a little scared for anyone if all they needed to perform the search was an ominous photo of a green truck in the area of the abductions.
Ummm why would they be live tweeting it if there was a publication ban?

You know they need permission or a warrant to search the property right? They can't just go to a judge and say "hey here is an ominous photo of a green truck, this guy has a similar green truck so can we have a warrant?"

Quote:
Faulkner said a big break in the case came when Allen Liknes’ spouse, Patti Garland, mentioned her father owned a truck matching the description of one seen in the area of the disappearance — one driven almost exclusively by her brother, Douglas.

The information led police to the Garland property, she said.
http://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/...her-to-testify

I'm sure there is more to the time line that will come out during the trial. Hopefully there will be enough info to put your mind at ease that the big bad police can't just go and search anyone with an ominous green truck photo.
Hockeyguy15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 08:23 PM   #35
Kjesse
First Line Centre
formerly Delgar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Exp:
Default

And there was a rust spot in the photo of the green truck which matched the rust spot on the Garland green truck.

There should be little doubt how the police got the warrant with that kind of evidence.
Kjesse is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Kjesse For This Useful Post:
Old 01-16-2017, 08:32 PM   #36
Hockeyguy15
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delgar View Post
And there was a rust spot in the photo of the green truck which matched the rust spot on the Garland green truck.

There should be little doubt how the police got the warrant with that kind of evidence.
For most people, apparently not everyone though. Clearly he hasn't made any effort to inform himself on this case.
Hockeyguy15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 08:39 PM   #37
CaramonLS
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15 View Post
You know they need permission or a warrant to search the property right? They can't just go to a judge and say "hey here is an ominous photo of a green truck, this guy has a similar green truck so can we have a warrant?"

http://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/...her-to-testify

I'm sure there is more to the time line that will come out during the trial. Hopefully there will be enough info to put your mind at ease that the big bad police can't just go and search anyone with an ominous green truck photo.
Yeah, that was kind of the purpose of my question, I'd like to see what evidence they used to obtain the warrant aside from the truck, since that is the only evidence we have to date that connects him to the crimes.

Since the trial has been under publication ban we have not been privy to any of that information.

Wilkins last week imposed a publication ban on the evidence at the request of defence counsel Kim Ross.

The judge reiterated again Monday the ban was still in place, which covers both the mainstream media and any members of the public on social media sites like Facebook and Twitter.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/05/25...e-year-old-boy
CaramonLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 08:44 PM   #38
CaramonLS
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15 View Post
For most people, apparently not everyone though. Clearly he hasn't made any effort to inform himself on this case.
Not sure why you immediately jumped to being a prick, but I was asking a question regarding the evidence in the case. No, I have not read every article in regards to this case and I did not know that there was a specific rust stain on the truck that connected it to this guy.

That actual does make some sense, but I haven't read a source which mentioned that connection.
CaramonLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 08:46 PM   #39
Hockeyguy15
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS View Post
Yeah, that was kind of the purpose of my question, I'd like to see what evidence they used to obtain the warrant aside from the truck, since that is the only evidence we have to date that connects him to the crimes.

Since the trial has been under publication ban we have not been privy to any of that information.

Wilkins last week imposed a publication ban on the evidence at the request of defence counsel Kim Ross.

The judge reiterated again Monday the ban was still in place, which covers both the mainstream media and any members of the public on social media sites like Facebook and Twitter.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/05/25...e-year-old-boy
Well if they didn't have enough evidence to legally do the search I'm sure something would have come up during the preliminary hearing.

Your link doesn't work, so I'm not sure where you think the publication ban is coming from when literally every news outlet here is covering it.
Hockeyguy15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2017, 08:49 PM   #40
Hockeyguy15
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS View Post
Not sure why you immediately jumped to being a prick, but I was asking a question regarding the evidence in the case. No, I have not read every article in regards to this case and I did not know that there was a specific rust stain on the truck that connected it to this guy.

That actual does make some sense, but I haven't read a source which mentioned that connection.
Because you made a silly comment about an "ominous" photo the cops used, trying to spread fear that somehow this means the cops could illegally search anyone. If you're genuinely worried about that do a little research and put your mind at ease before you get worked up.
Hockeyguy15 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hockeyguy15 For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:50 AM.

Calgary Flames
2016-17




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016