Ana Kriegel - Boys A & B found guilty [Mod: Do NOT post identifying information]

Tomw86

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Of course they are. It would have had to be a pretty broken relationship between parent and child for them to be told something as crazy as their child has murdered someone, and they immediately believe it and cut ties. People go into denial to deal with shock. They will probably then start to blame themselves and try and figure out what they did wrong, when the truth could very well be that the actions of these boys had nothing to do with them.

My heart goes out to all parents involved. Absolutely moreso the parents of the deceased. They have gone through absolute hell and I hope with ever fibre of my being that they can find some sort of peace. However, in the very likely event that the parents of the boys had nothing to do with the incident, they are also grieving and it is horribly unfair to put any sort of blame on them unless warranted.

The relationship was already broken if the parents couldn't deduce or get a confession over exactly what happened from either child.

If they knew what had happened and still caused this to go to trial but letting them plead not guilty, then they are to blame.

If they didn't know, then they either intentionally turned a blind eye, or didn't want to know - this also attributes some blame to them.

Ulysses Gaze

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

We can only hope he gets taken care of in prison.

I get the feeling boy B was easily led from the limited stuff I read and heard, found the details very hard to take. Not usually upset easily, but christ this case had me turning the news off on a number of occasions

If not in prison, then someone ends him when he gets out.

jmayo

McCrack wrote: »

I don't think you get the analogy

Oh I get the analogy all right.
It is typical arrogance from high ranking legal professional.

It is trying to dress up and make it acceptable to represent some of the most morally reprehensible characters and do their best to get them to avoid their rightful punishment.

It is like how the legal team of these two scrotes will sit at home tonight and not see anything wrong with how they tried to claim to a jury there was no real evidence to convict their clients and how they were nice young lads from nice families.

Gimme A Pound

Gael23 wrote: »

Oberstown is too soft for murderers

It's been in the news for inmates having the run of the place.

branie2

The right verdict was given

Jupiter Mulligan

jmayo wrote: »

A 17 year old Thomas Murray killed his elderly neighbour in Co. Galway just to see what it was like.

Contrary to the advice and wishes of Castlerea prison governor and Gardai he was allowed out on temporary weekend release and 19 years later he bludgeoned another elderly neighbour to death.

Are you saying that because he was let out for a weekend 19 years earlier, he murdered someone else?

Where had he been during the intervening 19 years?

Hurrache

jmayo wrote: »

Oh I get the analogy all right.
It is typical arrogance from high ranking legal professional.

It is trying to dress up and make it acceptable to represent some of the most morally reprehensible characters and do their best to get them to avoid their rightful punishment.

It is like how the legal team of these two scrotes will sit at home tonight and not see anything wrong with how they tried to claim to a jury there was no real evidence to convict their clients and how they were nice young lads from nice families.

So you want people to not have a trial?

c.p.w.g.w

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

We can only hope he gets taken care of in prison.

I get the feeling boy B was easily led from the limited stuff I read and heard, found the details very hard to take. Not usually upset easily, but christ this case had me turning the news off on a number of occasions

I have the complete opposite opinion of Boy B. If he was easily led, he would have cried like a baby in his first interview and owned up. To me he’s a psychopath and pathological lier who could have easily been the mastermind behind the whole thing.

How two sick individuals managed to be in the same school at the same time is scary.

Iscreamkone

I feel so sorry for Ana's mother and father.
If it was one of mine I don't think I could be satisfied with any sentence given.
Life isn't enough, the Death Penalty isn't enough.

Jupiter Mulligan

Gimme A Pound wrote: »

It's been in the news for inmates having the run of the place.

The warders literally can't touch the little scummers in case they are accused of assault by some of the 'human rights' lawyers who infest such places like ticks on a dying rat.

Nerdlingr

Wombatman wrote: »

Not sure about that. There was no forensic evidence connecting Boy B to the scene.

There didn't need to be. Boy B put himself at the scene and said he witnessed the start of the assault, got scared and ran.

Franko.

DellyBelly wrote: »

I presume so? I haven't heard they were not?

Would you expect to be told If they were not?

iamwhoiam

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2019/0618/1056045-ana-kriegel/

A little insight into this poor childs struggles and her pain .

RIP Ana , my heart breaks for her family .But at least justice is served and we dont have to worry about these two murderers out on our streets .
And fair play to the jury it must have been traumatic to listen to and see the evidence .

Jupiter Mulligan

Hurrache wrote: »

So you want people to not have a trial?

I doubt it. I suspect that he would have preferred if the boys' lawyers had persuaded their clients to plead guilty. As would I.

But if they had, then the court case would have been much shorter, so the lawyers' fees would have been much lower.

Neyite

Strazdas wrote: »

RTE's Ola O'Donnell commenting on the way Boy B spoke about Ana's clothes and figure and saying this went down extremely badly in the court room. He was talking about a poor young girl who had been murdered after all.

retro:electro wrote: »

I remember that being covered. Didn’t he say she dressed like a slut? How absolutely tone deaf but an insight into the mind of the depraved piece of shlt

This is why casual slut-shaming at it's first instance needs to be stamped out in our kids. Nobody deserves anything to happen them for the way they are dressed - boy or girl. This mindset allowed them to see her as lesser to them, to be deserving of some sort of atrocity.

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

I get the feeling boy B was easily led from the limited stuff I read and heard, found the details very hard to take. Not usually upset easily, but christ this case had me turning the news off on a number of occasions

I got the feeling that B was the brains of the operation, and that he was smart enough to avoid leaving evidence at the scene by letting A carry out the plan. B admitted he stayed to watch part of the assault, and the Gardai believe that admission still fell far short of the truth.

Spanish Eyes

Very distressing case. I turned off every report that came through my earphones after the initial report repulsed and totally saddened me.

Anyway I wonder what the penalty would be if someone named them publicly? Contempt of court and the sentence for that would probably be longer than the guilty A and B more than likely.

The boys have not been at school, and won't be back there either. Everyone in the school knows their names, and with SM these days it is bound to come out at some point, either deliberately or unwittingly.

I think if it was my child I would announce their names in public and take the consequences, but Ana's family are probably far more dignified than I am.

Faugheen

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

I have the complete opposite opinion of Boy B. If he was easily led, he would have cried like a baby in his first interview and owned up. To me he’s a psychopath and pathological lier who could have easily been the mastermind behind the whole thing.

How two sick individuals managed to be in the same school at the same time is scary.

Exactly this for me. He lied and lied and lied some more in the police interviews and everytime he tried to throw Boy A under the bus.

Boy B is the orchestrator of this, 100%. No doubt some people will think he was easily led though.

He went from leaving them in the park to watching her die in the farmhouse in a matter of 8 Garda interviews. If he was innocently led, he would have sung straight away.

retro:electro

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

I have the complete opposite opinion of Boy B. If he was easily led, he would have cried like a baby in his first interview and owned up. To me he’s a psychopath and pathological lier who could have easily been the mastermind behind the whole thing.

How two sick individuals managed to be in the same school at the same time is scary.

I agree. And if we are to believe his version of events (which I don’t) then he left that house hearing Ana screaming for her life after being lured to her death and for that he is just as bad. But his story makes no sense. At the very best he led a vulnerable girl to her death and left her screaming for her life and at the very worst he was directly involved. I think he’s just the cleverer of the two.

gctest50

Nerdlingr wrote: »

There didn't need to be. Boy B put himself at the scene and said he witnessed the start of the assault, got scared and ran.

Boy B led her to death

blackwhite

bennyl10 wrote: »

They can’t have been tried as adults afaik?
Irish law doesn’t allow for it.(agin I could be wrong)

All child convictions have to be reviewed at 18

Serious crimes (rape and murder, plus a limited few other) are tried in the Central Criminal Court instead of the Children's Courts.

The procedures are almost identical, with some exceptions around protection of identities and other rules around courtroom access

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/children-charged-with-serious-crimes-face-different-criminal-justice-process-to-adults-1.3508849

However not all cases remain in the Children’s Court. Serious charges, such as homicide offences, are sent forward to either the Circuit or Central Criminal Courts. Here the children are effectively tried as adults before a judge and jury, although access to the court is still restricted.

Strazdas

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

I have the complete opposite opinion of Boy B. If he was easily led, he would have cried like a baby in his first interview and owned up. To me he’s a psychopath and pathological lier who could have easily been the mastermind behind the whole thing.

How two sick individuals managed to be in the same school at the same time is scary.

The constant lying of Boy B makes me think he is a wrong 'un. At a bare minimum, he knew his "friend" had murdered Ana and yet all he can think of is telling lie after lie under interrogation, even after several days.

He told so many lies that it's impossible to believe a single word he said under questioning.

Hurrache

Jupiter Mulligan wrote: »

I doubt it. I suspect that he would have preferred if the boys' lawyers had persuaded their clients to plead guilty. As would I.

But the court case would have been much shorter, so the lawyers' fees would have been much lower.

And you have an insight as to who, and why, made the decision to plead not guilty? Guilty people the world over of all ages plead innocence. Their lawyers had a responsibility to their clients, not matter how abhorrent they are. That's just the way it is. It's not the first time, and it's far from the last.

Ulysses Gaze

Iscreamkone wrote: »

I feel so sorry for Ana's mother and father.
If it was one of mine I don't think I could be satisfied with any sentence given.
Life is enough, the Death Penalty isn't enough.

Interesting you mention this because I saw a video today of the father of a five year old that had been murdered by a 16 year old neighbour 40 years ago in the US. The killer got life and is set to be released early for "Good Behaviour". He served 40 years.

This father went on the radio and stated very coldly and clearly that he will find this guy and murder him for what he did to his son. He said that at 78 he does not care about going to prison and that his own life ended with his sons 40 years previously anyway.

Mech1

I would wager that a few more kids in that school might have known what these two where planning, girls included.

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

Considering the DNA evidence, especially against Boy A I have no idea why they didn't.

Because there is no advantage to pleading guilty to murder.
A murder conviction is an automatic life sentence, so everyone charged with murder should plead not guilty, & maybe they could be convicted of manslaughter & a lesser sentence

gctest50

Strazdas wrote: »

The constant lying of Boy B makes me think he is a wrong 'un. At a bare minimum, he knew his "friend" had murdered Ana and yet all he can think of is telling lie after lie under interrogation, even after several days.

He told so many lies that it's impossible to believe a single word he said under questioning.

I'd like to see the look on his face when the hammer dropped, especially after this :

retro:electro wrote: »

I remember that being covered. Didn’t he say she dressed like a slut?
.........

Tomw86

Hurrache wrote: »

And you have an insight as to who, and why, made the decision to plead not guilty? Guilty people the world over of all ages plead innocence. Their lawyers had a responsibility to their clients, not matter how abhorrent they are. That's just the way it is. It's not the first time, and it's far from the last.

I may be incorrect in assuming this - but as their Guardians, if the parents wanted them to please guilty, then they would have had to submit that plea.......

iamwhoiam

Well done to the Gardai who handled this so well and never tripped up . And well done the jury who sat and listened and must be totally traumatised and will suffer over this and some will struggle I am sure to sleep at night .




https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2019/0618/1056046-boy-b-ana-kriegal-trial/

ohnonotgmail

Tomw86 wrote: »

I may be incorrect in assuming this - but as their Guardians, if the parents wanted them to please guilty, then they would have had to submit that plea.......

I dont think this is true at all. they get to make their own decisions based on the advice given to them.

Tomw86

bubblypop wrote: »

Because there is no advantage to pleading guilty to murder.
A murder conviction is an automatic life sentence, so everyone charged with murder should plead not guilty, & maybe they could be convicted of manslaughter & a lesser sentence

Would have negated the need for a court case. A lot less would be known about the case and details if there wasn't one.