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

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 18-06-2019 10:54PM

Nerdlingr wrote: »

I'll just post this again...

"Any person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the commission of an indictable offence shall be liable to be indicted, tried and punished as a principal offender."

Exactly. That’s the law here.

18-06-2019 10:55PM

Nerdlingr wrote: »

I'll just post this again...

"Any person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the commission of an indictable offence shall be liable to be indicted, tried and punished as a principal offender."

Foreknowledge of the crime is required. I very much doubt that Boy B had that. He states that he thought Boy A was joking when talking about harming her. He provided materials. But did he know a murder was about to take place? And if so why go to her house and thus become the prime or only suspect?

ILoveYourVibes · 18-06-2019 10:55PM

tayto lover wrote: »

I believe he was the chief organizer and planner of the whole lot.

He was at least equal. Kids can 'goad' each other. Maybe he thought he could talk his way out of it.

Plus he was injured.

18-06-2019 10:57PM

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

He gave the other boy the cord to choke her with. He lured her there. He watched while she was sexually assaulted and beaten to death.

I would say he did even more.

Like what? Given a complete absence of DNA or other forensic evidence tying him to the scene. The only was anyone knows he was there is due to his own admissions.

gctest50 · 18-06-2019 10:57PM

Sardonicat wrote: »

What about the older boy who propositioned Ana for sex and slapped her on the bum? A fecking caution! !!

Or the 3rd year lad who harrassing her on her youtube channel with sexual comments when she was in 6th class? 6th class.!

And he would have known it too because he knew enough about her to make fun of her for having a "fake" mum and Dad ............

<snip>* seems to a cesspit of paedos and now murderers

Slapping a primary school kid on the arse and propositioning her for sex ?

( * before anyone starts, it comes up now before you finish typing Ana K case)

Nerdlingr · 18-06-2019 10:59PM

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Exactly. That’s the law here.

Yep. It's basically as simple as that. That is the exact wording set out in Irish Law.

The prosecution presented a case where Boy A discusses with Boy B about killing Ana. Boy B gives Boy A building tape. Boy B then lures Ana to meet Boy A. Boy B watches as the attack starts. Whether he sees her die we will probably never know. Boy B then continually lies.

Aiding and abeting. The jury believed it. Tried as a principal offender. Murder. Job done.

LillySV · 18-06-2019 10:59PM

magic_murph wrote: »

Bit harsh to be fair.

Did you hear what the dad of child b said after the judgement ?

Sardonicat · 18-06-2019 10:59PM

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

tayto lover wrote: »

I believe he was the chief organizer and planner of the whole lot.

He was at least equal. Kids can 'goad' each other. Maybe he thought he could talk his way out of it.

Plus he was injured.

Boy B was not injured

18-06-2019 11:00PM

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

They were in the room. I am sure they FELT it was aimed at them.

Why would they? And again stick to the facts here. There's enough nonsense and conjecture being spouted here. The Dad may not be a nice guy. But he may also possibly be a decent man who has seen his son convicted of murder and he believed it was unjustified.

Sunflower 27 · 18-06-2019 11:02PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Foreknowledge of the crime is required. I very much doubt that Boy B had that. He states that he thought Boy A was joking when talking about harming her. He provided materials. But did he know a murder was about to take place? And if so why go to her house and thus become the prime or only suspect?

Because he believed, wrongly, that if he didn't actually do anything to her then he would get away with it?

He was quite adamant he just left at the park to start with. That was what he planned to say, until under pressure he cracked and admitted the truth

18-06-2019 11:02PM

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Eh, that's exactly my point.

Anyone who aids or abets a principal offender can be tried as a principal offender themself.
Hence why Boy B was found guilty of murder.

Once more, foreknowledge of the intended offence is required for conviction. And the Appeal will rule on whether that was present. The evidence implies it wasn't.

Nerdlingr · 18-06-2019 11:02PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Foreknowledge of the crime is required. I very much doubt that Boy B had that. He states that he thought Boy A was joking when talking about harming her. He provided materials. But did he know a murder was about to take place? And if so why go to her house and thus become the prime or only suspect?

They had the conversation about killing her. Boy B was shown to be a continual liar. Is it plausible that they hatched a plan to kill her...yes given the circumstances! Prosecution presented it and the jury believed it.

ILoveYourVibes · 18-06-2019 11:03PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Foreknowledge of the crime is required. I very much doubt that Boy B had that. He states that he thought Boy A was joking when talking about harming her. He provided materials. But did he know a murder was about to take place? And if so why go to her house and thus become the prime or only suspect?

He did.

Zombie mask killer Boy A had a sick interest in violent porn which included searches for child abuse and women being forced to have sex with animals.
Gardai downloaded more than 5,000 files from two mobile phones found inside the then 13-year-old killer’s house.
An expert uncovered these files were pornographic images of violence against children and women.
The search history evidence on those phones was not included in the trial as the judge believed it would “unbalance” the jury’s deliberations.

In one search he typed “Anastasia has the perfect body for f%&king”.

And “Teen sweet Russian”

What kind of 14 yr old boy has a friend like that?

Stoner · 18-06-2019 11:03PM

Gimme A Pound wrote:

I've seen levelheaded people on this thread, whom I'm pretty sure are parents, condemn the boys' parents. I don't buy the notion that people would stick by their children no matter what. When it comes to horrors like this, I hope not.

Exactly. I grew up knowing there were actions I'd be disowned for, or at least thought I would. It was part of a deterrent, a duty to society.

You can still stand with your child, get them help and do the right thing while recognising they did something wrong.

I suspect that some patents think only they can speak of the parent child bond. Their bond is so strong that nobody else can understand it, yet they think they can measure other people's.

It's a monumental lack of empathy masked by a narcissistic view of their own relationship with their child. Its possibly not good for the childs moral development either.

Regardless of what happened up to the murder, including any potential tampering with evidence initially. There came a point when they chose to take stand for the wrong thing, to hide behind their love, people will understand.

No amount of pulling on fellow patents' heart strings should hide that imo. It's a weakness in character, "don't judge it, it might happen to you"

I would be sick with shame if my boy did something like this, personally I'd be finished.

But

He'd still be my boy. I'd still love him. I'd have to make decisions and do what I though was right, ultimately for him too. This is the time to consider other parents, particularly the ones left with nothing, that's the heart string to pull.

18-06-2019 11:03PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Ah ok, that makes it alright then. He’s a nice man so.

He may well be. He may not. Not sure how I'd react if my son was convicted of murder. Particularly if there was little evidence. Can't say I'd be composed.

Nerdlingr · 18-06-2019 11:04PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Once more, foreknowledge of the intended offence is required for conviction. And the Appeal will rule on whether that was present. The evidence implies it wasn't.

The fact Boy B brought up the conversation they previously had is foreknowledge. He literally said Boy A told him he wanted to kill Ana.

Strazdas · 18-06-2019 11:05PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Foreknowledge of the crime is required. I very much doubt that Boy B had that. He states that he thought Boy A was joking when talking about harming her. He provided materials. But did he know a murder was about to take place? And if so why go to her house and thus become the prime or only suspect?

The hours and hours of video testimony seems to have buried him. People can definitely form a distinct impression of a person watching them being questioned for eight or ten hours or whatever it was. The dozens of lies coupled with his general demeanour appears to have convinced the jury of his guilt and that this was no naive innocent who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

18-06-2019 11:05PM

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Psychopaths rarely do.

You are way too naive to be a lawyer.

What is it like to watch a young girl die?? What do you have to have inside you to NOT break down like a baby and tell everyone?

You have to be something else. And he admitted he saw it.

You're describing a sociopath rather than a psychopath. And reaction to crime rarely goes down a predictable route.

18-06-2019 11:07PM

Faugheen wrote: »

See I call bullsh*t here.

Any legal professional worth their salt knows you can't base any case beit for theft of a packet of crisps or murder based on a few articles you read.

No idea what you're saying. I guess my skills don't stretch to deciphering.

Faugheen · 18-06-2019 11:09PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

He may well be. He may not. Not sure how I'd react if my son was convicted of murder. Particularly if there was little evidence. Can't say I'd be composed.

'Particularly if there was little evidence'.

You're absolutely not a lawyer, or just a really bad one.

anewme · 18-06-2019 11:10PM

Stoner wrote: »

Exactly. I grew up knowing there were actions I'd be disowned for, or at least thought I would. It was part of a deterrent, a duty to society.

You can still stand with your child, get them help and do the right thing while recognising they did something wrong.

I suspect that some patents think only they can speak of the parent child bond. Their bond is so strong that nobody else can understand it, yet they think they can measure other people's.

It's a monumental lack of empathy masked by a narcissistic view of their own relationship with their child. Its possibly not good for the childs moral development either.

Regardless of what happened up to the murder, including any potential tampering with evidence initially. There came a point when they chose to take stand for the wrong thing, to hide behind their love, people will understand.

No amount of pulling on fellow patents' heart strings should hide that imo. It's a weakness in character, "don't judge it, it might happen to you"

I would be sick with shame if my boy did something like this, personally I'd be finished.

But

He'd still be my boy. I'd still love him. I'd have to make decisions and do what I though was right, ultimately for him too. This is the time to consider other parents, particularly the ones left with nothing, that's the heart string to pull.

But hopefully you’d not have a tantrum effing and blinding into the faces of parents whose daughter died a horrific death in which your son was culpable.

The absolute arrogance of this man is astounding.

petrolcan · 18-06-2019 11:11PM

Gimme A Pound wrote: »

Moving the goalposts. It was violent bullying in your last post. Now it's "something that could be construed as bullying" which "everyone" is guilty of. Firstly you don't know everyone, secondly - don't judge everyone by your standards in order to feel better. The vast majority of people never engage in violent bullying, and damn right those who do so should get done for assault.

You're right. I didn't intend to move any posts but my original reply was to 'violent bullying'.

Again, you are right, I don't know everyone. In all my years chatting with friends, colleagues and acquaintances about being a teenager, bullying has come up and every one of us admitted to it in some shape or form. The general consensus is that 'kids are sh1ts'

As to getting done for assault, see my comment above about kids.

This murder is awful, no doubt about that.

However, there are still a thousand questions to be answered. The young girl was being bullied and it was common knowledge so why wasn't something done about it? And by something done, I mean by everyone involved. Every bully, every parent of every bully. Where was the support for Ana? For Ana's parents?
What did the school actually do with the bullying reports? What about the internet companies do about the abuse?

There is a much larger discussion to be had and maybe here is not the right place to do so but we need to do something. And I mean all of us actually doing something. Don't just sit there posting to boards saying something must be done, get off your aris and write to your TD, local council, representative, whatever but do something.

tayto lover · 18-06-2019 11:12PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

He may well be. He may not. Not sure how I'd react if my son was convicted of murder. Particularly if there was little evidence. Can't say I'd be composed.

****load of evidence.
He might have fooled you but the jury thankfully didn’t buy it.

Sheep breeder · 18-06-2019 11:12PM

lemmno wrote: »

Read a post a few pages back that a youth club worker saw a group of kids get up whenever Ana came down to sit with them. I don’t understand why so many adults just watched things like that happen? Isolation is so cruel, those kids should have been told that they make everyone feel welcome or they’re not in the youth club. End of.

They should be ashamed to say that the person witnessed this and said or didn’t report such behaviour.

STB. · 18-06-2019 11:13PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Once more, foreknowledge of the intended offence is required for conviction. And the Appeal will rule on whether that was present. The evidence implies it wasn't.

Read the reports for God sake.

Own Admissions.

tayto lover · 18-06-2019 11:14PM

STB. wrote: »

Read the reports for God sake.

Own Admissions.

He’s obviously just trolling.

18-06-2019 11:15PM

First and foremost, what an awfully sad tragedy. Have seen Ana on the papers every day but tonight it hits resonated hardest. Hearing her poor Mam's comments was so harrowing and heart-breaking. Really and truly. I work in a prison and am surrounded by murderers and lifers. This is different though. As grown up and as beautiful looking as she was, this was just a child. It's filled me with sadness more than rage. Just absolutely devastating.

Not that I want to spend long talking about the creatures that did this to her but it will be noted among the other prisoners that there was a sexual assault as part of this. For that reason, their lives won't be worth living if let into general population. Not too sure how Oberstown will deal with that but I'm fairly certain word will leak through as to who these new additions are and it won't be pleasant for them... and I'm ok with that.

Bobblehats · 18-06-2019 11:15PM

PressRun wrote: »

Never read or listened to the details of the last moments of her life, but read a bit about who Ana was as a person. Talented and sensitive were two word that came to mind. A girl that probably would have flourished once outside the toxic school environment. But also could not escape how sad and lonely she seemed to be, and how much she craved friendship.
A conversation needs to be had about how tough it is for these kids, the relentless bullying that can turn violent, the mental anguish a lot of them seem to be going through.
What a horrible thing those boys did to a girl so full of potential and her family.

I don’t believe she was that lonely she was a cool enough chick, and would have had at least had one solid enough pal who was keen to hang out with her in fact I remember her youtube account when the news broke. There was another girl with her as far as I can recall

And someone suggesting alienation because of foreign descent well she looked and sounded irish enough to me, maybe a little russian across the eyes in a certain light but that would be pretty fecking pedantic. I’m keen to know what subculture these kids were into the devil in music was the recurring theme for most of our generation but none of us would actually think of indulging such things. I see these boys had a satanic study group what was that all about?

18-06-2019 11:15PM

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

And yet here we are. A murder conviction.

And therefore the jury must have accepted this too because there is a murder conviction.

You might know more than this judge, and the DPP and the legal system on this one but I doubt it.

You started off by claiming that there might be a technicality on the inadmissible evidence (and certainly that might be grounds for an appeal) and that the gardai might have interviewed coercively, something you seem to have recanted on.

Now you are claiming that the entire Irish legal system doesn’t know what constitutes murder but you do.

Huge if true. Heads should roll.

Never claimed to know more, or point that out from my posts if you'd be so gracious. I posit that the conviction may be unsafe. Thus appealable and winnable. As many case are. On a daily basis if you check the court reports.

Not allowing the doctor to give psychiatric evidence was I believe a judicial error. No justifiable reason for exclusion. That alone will ensure there's an Appeal granted. The court may weigh it up and discount it but not allowing it allows cracks in the conviction.

No recanting on the Gardai interviews. I stated that the defence team will continue to argue they were coercive. I believe they were not but more weight may be given to the argument if the psychiatric evidence is allowed.

Legal system is very clear on what constitutes murder. Some posters here less so. Him being at the scene is insufficient. And if he wasn't aware that a murder was going to take place then he is not guilty.

Faugheen · 18-06-2019 11:15PM

Seathrun66 wrote: »

No idea what you're saying. I guess my skills don't stretch to deciphering.

But you're basing a case on what you've read in the media.

A legal profession knows what happens in the court room isn't always portrayed as well in writing, no matter the case. You need to be in the court room to get a real indicator.

You, a supposed lawyer, are basing your thoughts from what was written down and having not set foot inside the court room.

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

Comments