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

Galwayguy35 · 19-06-2019 05:59PM

Happy4all wrote: »

I think it's time to change the law re anonymity when found guilty.

Do they lose that right anyway when they reach 18?

No they will have it after they turn 18

uck51js9zml2yt · 19-06-2019 06:00PM

flos1964 wrote: »

Fair enough ...you might not but somebody ...anybody...no thats bull****...lots of them knew.

My concern is that everyone knew she was bullied in the school. Why did her parents leave her there? Why not move her?

Spanish Eyes · 19-06-2019 06:01PM

GreeBo wrote: »

If it's a toss up between removing the bully or rehabilitating them I know where I'd vote tbh

I think bullies at school age work in packs, herd mentality. What do they do with them then?

Happy4all · 19-06-2019 06:06PM

gozunda wrote: »

Both boys were seen carry backpacks.

Only Boy A's was found afaik

They other unsounded issue is with Boy b's mobile phones

His father painted a picture of him as not into social media etc and that he had 'lost' two phones that had been bought for him

In light of the thousands of seriously fuked up pornographic images boy A had on his phone - I wonder did boy b's phone disappear deliberatly.

Kids these days won't leave a phone out of there hand. Strange to lose two.

Spanish Eyes · 19-06-2019 06:08PM

Happy4all wrote: »

I think it's time to change the law re anonymity when found guilty.

Do they lose that right anyway when they reach 18?

Not sure, but would like to know. AFAIS in the Bulger case in UK the perpetrators were given new identities.

I think I would like to know if they might be in my locality when they are released.

But as I said earlier there are many children in Oberstown who are anonymous and probably will be forever for the crimes they committed. Some of which are serious sexual assaults, amongst other awful crimes.

I think once they reach 18 their identities will be revealed anyway by someone somewhere.

It is a different thing when an adult murderer is released, people will know who they are, what they look like and so on from media reports. No so with child murderers.

Be interesting to see what happens at the sentencing hearing.

cj maxx · 19-06-2019 06:08PM

Rogelio Purring Dresser wrote: »

My concern is that everyone knew she was bullied in the school. Why did her parents leave her there? Why not move her?

How can you blame parents for that? Pbs

Wanderer2010 · 19-06-2019 06:10PM

I really really hope there is a God. Very hard to believe in one when a lovely naïve innocent child is raped and murdered by two absolute demons. What the fcuk is wrong with this world?

iamwhoiam · 19-06-2019 06:11PM

Rogelio Purring Dresser wrote: »

My concern is that everyone knew she was bullied in the school. Why did her parents leave her there? Why not move her?

Why not ask them ? Honestly this victim blaming is so unnecessary

BarryD2 · 19-06-2019 06:11PM

brooke 2 wrote: »

No surprise that the psycho behaved in that thug like manner in the courtroom yesterday.

It was reported earlier this afternoon that the crackdown on FB and Twitter was initiated by the father/ parents of Boy B. Perhaps he's as keen to hide his own identity as much as his sons??

Which I suppose begs the question that if Boy B cannot be identified due to the Childrens Act, can his father or parents??

tuxy · 19-06-2019 06:12PM

Rogelio Purring Dresser wrote: »

My concern is that everyone knew she was bullied in the school. Why did her parents leave her there? Why not move her?

She was receiving conciliating, her parents believed she had some psychological issues and if that was the case moving school may not have helped and may have even exasperated these issues.

AudreyHepburn · 19-06-2019 06:13PM

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I see people on FB are saying they have pics of them and are ignoring the Garda warning and are going to keep them so people will know who they are when they get out.

Whilst the idea of these boys being protected by anonymity for the rest of their lives does not sit well with me this is just silly reckless irresponsible behavior.

What good will it do except land those sharing the photographs in jail. That’s not going to help anyone least of all Ana and her family.

tuxy · 19-06-2019 06:13PM

BarryD2 wrote: »

Which I suppose begs the question that if Boy B cannot be identified due to the Childrens Act, can his father or parents??

Of course the parents can't, try to think about it logically.

19-06-2019 06:14PM

Happy4all wrote: »

I think it's time to change the law re anonymity when found guilty.

Do they lose that right anyway when they reach 18?

Apparently not. Was listening to an NUI law professor on radio this evening and he was asked that question.

ChuckLarry · 19-06-2019 06:16PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Not sure, but would like to know. AFAIS in the Bulger case in UK the perpetrators were given new identities.

I think I would like to know if they might be in my locality when they are released.

I could be wrong but I remember reading somewhere that they were actually given new identities a second time as the first ones had become public knowledge

Jimbob1977 · 19-06-2019 06:17PM

My fear is that the judge's hands will be tied during the sentencing process by legislation.

I'm expecting an outrageously short sentence.

TheDiceMan2020 · 19-06-2019 06:17PM

It is sickening reading about the way these two evil fcuks are going to be treated now they have been convicted.

Molly coddled with everything made available to them.

While Ana's life is over.

We badly need to rethink the liberal policies that have turned the system into a complete joke where criminals get better treatment than their victims.

I won't hold my breath. People will still vote for parties that endorse this bull****

secman · 19-06-2019 06:20PM

ChuckLarry wrote: »

I could be wrong but I remember reading somewhere that they were actually given new identities a second time as the first ones had become public knowledge

One is currently in jail again afaik under his new identity, for child porn on his computer, a totally fcked up person by all accounts .
The other lad afaik has never come to police attention since his release.

Dante7 · 19-06-2019 06:21PM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Whilst the idea of these boys being protected by anonymity for the rest of their lives does not sit well with me this is just silly reckless irresponsible behavior.

What good will it do except land those sharing the photographs in jail. That’s not going to help anyone least of all Ana and her family.

Well I now know their names and what they look like, so there is zero chance of my daughter ever dating either of them in the future.

omega man · 19-06-2019 06:21PM

At the beginning I had thought it was strange that they’d gone for a murder charge against boy B however as the daily updates from court were released it became very clear why.

It’s worth noting they couldn’t use Boy A against him as he had pleaded not guilty and therefore hadn’t incriminated boy B. Detectives still built a strong case without physical evidence or Boy A testimony.

I’m surprised that with the clear cut case against boy A that he didn’t admit it and bring boy B down with him...

Dante7 · 19-06-2019 06:23PM

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

My fear is that the judge's hands will be tied during the sentencing process by legislation.

I'm expecting an outrageously short sentence.

The Judge's hands aren't tied. He can sentence them to life if he wishes.

19-06-2019 06:24PM

secman wrote: »

One is currently in jail again afaik under his new identity, for child porn on his computer, a totally fcked up person by all accounts .
The other lad afaik has never come to police attention since his release.

Yes Venebles has been in all sorts of trouble since he got out, totally fcuked up as you said.

Thompson has not been heard of since.

Lackadaisical · 19-06-2019 06:25PM

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

My fear is that the judge's hands will be tied during the sentencing process by legislation.

I'm expecting an outrageously short sentence.

There haven't really been many of these kinds of cases, but in 2005, Mr Justice Barry white sentenced a 15-year-old to life for murder, the only exception being that he was to be brought before him in a decade for review. He was released in 2016.

There's a good bit of background to that in Conor Gallagher's article from May last year:

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

There's nothing preventing a judge sentencing a minor to life, but it's just not mandatory whereas it would be in an adult case of this type.

Also with regards to the absolute injunction on identifying them, it includes publishing any identifying features such as their school or family details. It's really broad and would be somewhat open to interpretation by the court, as far as I am aware anyway.

tuxy · 19-06-2019 06:25PM

omega man wrote: »

I’m surprised that with the clear cut case against boy A that he didn’t admit it and bring boy B down with him...

Here's why, no penalty for a not guilty plea, hoping that Garda would slip up and it would be downgraded to manslaughter.
This needs to change, there needs to be a penalty for dragging out a long case in front of a grieving family in the hopes of getting off on a technicality.

OwlsZat · 19-06-2019 06:26PM

Dante7 wrote: »

The Judge's hands aren't tied. He can sentence them to life if he wishes.

The sentence will be life with a review of the sentence after 10 or 12 years.

They should be named. Anna was named and made every headline going. They shouldn't be spared the same treatment.

80sChild · 19-06-2019 06:27PM

Dante7 wrote: »

The Judge's hands aren't tied. He can sentence them to life if he wishes.

Correct. The only constraint is that a childs sentence cannot exceed the maximum an adult would get for the same offence. An adult would get life for this so that is immaterial here.

jobbridge4life · 19-06-2019 06:28PM

TheDiceMan2020 wrote: »

It is sickening reading about the way these two evil fcuks are going to be treated now they have been convicted.

Molly coddled with everything made available to them.

While Ana's life is over.

We badly need to rethink the liberal policies that have turned the system into a complete joke where criminals get better treatment than their victims.

I won't hold my breath. People will still vote for parties that endorse this bull****

What we badly need is for people not to take one horrific case, no matter how horrendous, and try to use it as a tool to advance their own political agendas.

___

I'm prepared now to be down voted into oblivion.

I don't know what sad, needy impulse exists in people who won't stand up to the bully next to them, that makes them imagine they are somehow the one fool who can 'tell it like it is, and give those boys what they needed'. You wouldn't dare. You are a saddo behind a keyboard. You don't know the details of the case, you don't know the families involved. You have so much you could do right now and tomorrow to really genuinely improve the lives of all around you and lessen the chances of horrors like this happening again.

AND YOU WON'T. Because you'll be on here moaning and cribbing about judges letting people off easy and other sh!te like that. The next time there is a rape case half of you will be saying the woman basically asked to leave the accused's house bleeding and bawling because 'sure didn't she go in, in the first place'.

Disgusting. Repulsive and pathetic.

screamer · 19-06-2019 06:30PM

OwlsZat wrote: »

The sentence will be life with a review of the sentence after 10 or 12 years.

They should be named. Anna was named and made every headline going. They shouldn't be spared the same treatment.

Named and every detail they could scrape up about her fed to the world. She got no privacy, she got no dignity, they took her life, they should get no anonymity, their names should be fed to the world too. Ana’s family had to go through all that because of what they did, I don’t see why their families should be protected either.

jimmynokia · 19-06-2019 06:31PM

My two cents.. The media are milking this for one and why protect these two when this was calculated. Archaic laws protect the guilty yet again im pretty sure parents would want to know what these two look like for future reference..
Also the images are now widely circulating around whatsapp I know it kinda answers the above but the law needs to change and how are people using message apps going to be done??? Or as many have suggested on social that this is just scare tactics, Do we not have a right to know regardless

Lackadaisical · 19-06-2019 06:32PM

The laws aren't that archaic. They only date from 2001.

Ursus Horribilis · 19-06-2019 06:32PM

Dante7 wrote: »

Well I now know their names and what they look like, so there is zero chance of my daughter ever dating either of them in the future.

That's assuming (a) the photographs of the right people are being circulated and (b) you'll still be able to recognise those children when they grow into adulthood. Anyone can grab a photo of two lads, scribble A and B on it and set it off into the wild west that is social media. Sometimes I wonder who are the adults in this situation.

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

Comments