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

dickangel · 19-06-2019 09:57PM

mrjoneill wrote: »

She was stripped naked, not easy while holding down a person that was very strong and fit. Boy B stated she put up her hands to remove her clothing, he seems to know a lot how they were removed.

So how does one person get covered in DNA and the other have no trace at all?

Sunflower 27 · 19-06-2019 09:58PM

dickangel wrote: »

So the reason you're dreaming up various morbid scenarios is to try and somehow prove Boy A intended to kill Ana? He was found guilty of murder. It's obvious he intended to kill her. Just quit the ghoulishness, it's disrespectful and utterly pointless.

I'm not dreaming anything up. It is how she was found.

His defense tried to claim it was not premeditated.

It clearly was if she was left to die while A walked off. The way she was found made me question that.

volchitsa · 19-06-2019 10:00PM

She'd been hit on the back of the head to start off. That alone would have made her much more vulnerable than if both had started off face to face and then it degenerated from there. So not impossible that a strong boy who knew some martial arts could have overpowered her on his own.
It is odd the other boy seems to have stood there and done nothing, but there was none of his DNA on her, not identifiable anyway. That's actually why I wonder if he wasn't in fact the instigator.

Hoboo · 19-06-2019 10:01PM

mrjoneill wrote: »

She was stripped naked, not easy while holding down a person that was very strong and fit. Boy B stated she put up her hands to remove her clothing, he seems to know a lot how they were removed.

Not wanting to speculate on something so horrible, it doesn't take a genius to work it out.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 10:01PM

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

I'm not dreaming anything up. It is how she was found.

His defense tried to claim it was not premeditated.

It clearly was if she was left to die while A walked off. The way she was found made me question that.

I think the fact that it took over 40 mins for the list of injuries to be read out is evidence enough that the intent was to kill. There's literally no doubt, hence why he was found guilty of murder.

Dante7 · 19-06-2019 10:03PM

dickangel wrote: »

So how does one person get covered in DNA and the other have no trace at all?

Where are you getting that Boy A was covered in Ana's DNA? His DNA was (semen) was found on Ana, of the other way round.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 10:04PM

Dante7 wrote: »

Where are you getting that Boy A was covered in Ana's DNA? His DNA was (semen) was found on Ana, of the other way round.

Are you serious? There was blood all over his belongings. It was key evidence.

strandroad · 19-06-2019 10:04PM

Dante7 wrote: »

Where are you getting that Boy A was covered in Ana's DNA? His DNA was (semen) was found on Ana, of the other way round.

Her blood was on his clothes etc., multiple locations.

Dante7 · 19-06-2019 10:04PM

Wombatman · 19-06-2019 10:05PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Again.

1. Boy A told him he was going to murder Ana.
Boy B said he didn't believe him. Why did Boy B volunteer this info to incriminate himself? Boy B lied so much, his testimony is worthless, so why believe this part?

2. Boy B took her to the scene of her death. CCTV proves this also her father saw him at the door.
Does not equate to murder if he did not know what Boy A had planned.

3. Boy B supplied the stick tape used to subdue her.
Does not equate to murder if he did not know what Boy A had planned.

4. Boy B watches it all and doesn’t help or even ask Boy A to stop.
Does not equate to murder.

5. In his interviews Boy B refers to Ana as dressing like a slut. No remorse.
Does not equate to murder.

6. Boy B changes his story at least 9 times in his questioning.
Does not equate to murder.

7. The interviewing detectives describe him as being smart conniving and confident little ****.
Does not equate to murder.

8. The cctv also showed him coming back a good bit later from the scene than he said. So he hung around enjoying it all.
Any proof what he did at this time?

I really can’t see him beating this rap and hopefully the little murderer will have a long painful life in custody.

People need to understand that for Boy B to be guilty of murder the prosecution must prove either:

1. He participated in the act of killing
or
2. He helped Boy A with the murder in the full knowledge of what Boy A was about to do.

From what I have read there is no proof for one.

The IT article addresses point two.

Nevertheless, it only got them so far. Boy B was shown repeatedly lying to gardaí, but there was zero forensic evidence linking him to the killing. In order to prove murder, the prosecution needed to prove he knew the plan that day was to kill Ana. To do this they relied heavily on Boy B’s admission that Boy A had asked him a month earlier if he wanted to kill the girl.

The entire case against Boy B would essentially boil down to one issue: Did he believe Boy A when he said this or did he think he was joking? If the former was true Boy B was guilty, if it was the latter he was innocent.

This is will be the main focus of Boy B's appeal

From the IT Article

One of the main objectives of Boy B’s defence team was to have the jury hear the evidence of Dr Humphries, the psychologist who examined the teen at the start of the year and determined he had been traumatised by witnessing the attack on Ana.

In the absence of the jury, Humphries repeated what he said in his report, that the trauma caused Boy B to tell the gardaí “untruths”. The doctor said he didn’t like to use the word “lie” because he didn’t want to seem judgmental.

He told Colgan the boy was bright but naive and immature. By way of illustration, he said that, during his stay in Oberstown, Boy B had asked for Lego to play with – a request the staff had never had before.

Grehan’s cross-examination of Humphries for the prosecution was easily the most combative of the entire trial. Counsel took particular issue with the doctor’s assertion that Boy B had “no knowledge of a plan for murder”.

Grehan said this was a matter for the jury. He said the doctor’s report contained a lot of jargon but there “doesn’t appear to be any engagement with the facts of the interviews”.

He submitted that allowing the doctor’s evidence into the trial would trespass on the function of the jury as the judges of fact and effectively make Humphries a “13th juror”. After taking the night to think about it, McDermott excluded the doctor’s evidence entirely.

All of Boy Bs testimony will become junk if it is accepted that "the trauma [by witnessing the attack on Ana] caused Boy B to tell the gardaí “untruths”.

Boy B's conviction is entirely based on his own testimony.

If there were text messages, recordings, notes etc between the two for example, detailing a pact or plan to kill Ana, this would be solid proof that Boy B knew.

Why during deliberations did the jury ask for DVDs of seven of Boy B’s Garda interviews?

19-06-2019 10:05PM

Dante7 wrote: »

The psychologist who was hired by the defence and who didn't even review the Garda interviews before submitting his report? The Judge was correct it ruling it as inadmissable.

Yes the very same. My point is that we don't know with any certainty who these boys are, or indeed what they are. I've been thinking a lot on this case. I haven't a clue as to what went on in the minds of Boy A and Boy B. Were they both the product of a dysfunctional home? Did they fit the criteria for Cluster B personality disorders? Were they simply bad? Was one the ring leader and if so which one?
Its horrendous. Poor Ana and her poor family.

Strazdas · 19-06-2019 10:05PM

volchitsa wrote: »

She'd been hit on the back of the head to start off. That alone would have made her much more vulnerable than if both had started off face to face and then it degenerated from there. So not impossible that a strong boy who knew some martial arts could have overpowered her on his own.
It is odd the other boy seems to have stood there and done nothing, but there was none of his DNA on her, not identifiable anyway. That's actually why I wonder if he wasn't in fact the instigator.

The pathologist suggested that the physical attack indeed came first followed by the sexual assault.

The prosecution case was that B watched on voyeuristically.....this was in their opening arguments

donkeykong5 · 19-06-2019 10:05PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I wondered this too. But apparently she was hit as soon as she walked into where Boy A was. So it doesn't seem like she was able to defend herself?

I read yesterday that when she went missing police were searching the park and came across a man and a boy out for a walk. They stopped to talk to the police. They later discovered it was Boy A and his dad. There he was walking through the park with his dad chatting to police all the while knowing she was dead because of her in that manky place.

The teacher said he was an intelligent boy with not an ounce of trouble from him.

You never think of something like this happening and to think two 13 year old came up with it, carried it out a d calmly tried to get away with it. It's crazy stuff

Ana fought like a tiger for her life. She had defensive wounds. Her nails were broken.
Jaysus lads read the court reports. It’s all there.

Poor girl. She really had a terrible death. It's awful reading what she went through. It's like a horror story and then you suddenly realise it's all true. Hope those protected boys rot in hell.

pjohnson · 19-06-2019 10:07PM

anewme · 19-06-2019 10:11PM

People recounting here in graphic detail what happened to Ana in that place is too much to bear.

Locals want it levelled, despite its history and I dont blame them.

iamwhoiam · 19-06-2019 10:12PM

The unfairness in a lot of peoples eyes that Ana was not afforded the same protection . Her life , her difficulties , her struggles , her pain , her horrific death was on every single newspaper for weeks on end . No one gave her protection from that

Shemale · 19-06-2019 10:13PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

You have no right, no information and (excuse me if i'm wrong) no special powers of psychic insight, to allow you legitimately assert your personal certainties.

The man raised a child. The man loved a child. The child stands accused of murder. For which, in the case of his child, there is no forensic evidence, and clear forensic evidence against another child.

You have no right, no information and (excuse me if i'm wrong) no special powers of psychic insight, to allow you legitimately assert "The man loved a child"

Maybe he doesnt love his son?

If he loved his child he would have been present when his son and wife were speaking to Gardai on their doorstep, instead of walking around the house, going to bed early, who sleeps that early and for the night when the son they love is speaking to Gardai for an hour when a girl he knew has gone missing.

Or maybe he spent the night destroying evidence cause he knew the son he loved was involved.

mondeo · 19-06-2019 10:13PM

Dante7 wrote: »

Yeah hang on, I'll just post their details here for you. Will you visit me in jail when I do three years?

Ye, whats your favourite food and I'll bring it along ?

I'm sure someone could pm. I'm reading elsewhere their identities have been circulating, isn't going to be a big secret any longer.

mrjoneill · 19-06-2019 10:13PM

Fusitive wrote: »

Boy B was not a master puppeteer, if he was, he gave away the biggest clue to the case by directly putting himself in the line of suspicion by calling to Ana's house while the other boy was hiding away.

He prob though Ana was at home alone & it was only chance her dad saw him. If her dad didn't see him the case could very well have the "disappeared " about it. Where exactly would the search begin? There is a possibility both of these scvmbags planned to go back bury the body which would have been found only accidentally & the forensics would have degenerated that they would have no value. Boy B prob had not the physical capacity to do it alone so he would not draw attention. I would look at him going to the house knowingly aware there was a kill plan going on as he furthering that agenda or led that agenda.

ILoveYourVibes · 19-06-2019 10:14PM

I want the government to do something to prevent this.

Social workers in schools ALL schools to watch out for and deal with troubled students .

Anti bullying officers. Making bullying a crime. A task force to deal with children's exposure to porn.

smurgen · 19-06-2019 10:15PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

The unfairness in a lot of peoples eyes that Ana was not afforded the same protection . Her life , her difficulties , her struggles , her pain , her horrific death was on every single newspaper for weeks on end . No one gave her protection from that

And her character smeared repeatedly. I think if you are found guilty your names should be released.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 10:15PM

mondeo wrote: »

Ye, whats your favourite food and I'll bring it along ?

I'm sure someone could pm. I'm reading elsewhere their identities have been circulating, isn't going to be a big secret any longer.

There's also been an image of an innocent kid circulating where it's wrongly claimed he was one of the boys.

smurgen · 19-06-2019 10:17PM

dickangel wrote: »

There's also been an image of an innocent kid circulating where it's wrongly claimed he was one of the boys.

Well the boy who done it is detained so surely that would let any would be vigilante know they're wrong.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 10:19PM

smurgen wrote: »

Well the boy who done it is detained so surely that would let any would be vigilante know they're wrong.

Fail to see any logic there. The pic was taken from school pics taken a while back. Also, if you (for some reason) think pics of the boys can't exist while they're detained then what's the point in sending pics?

ILoveYourVibes · 19-06-2019 10:21PM

dickangel wrote: »

There's also been an image of an innocent kid circulating where it's wrongly claimed he was one of the boys.

If they released the identity of the boys we wouldn't have these issues.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 10:22PM

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

If they released the identity of the boys we wouldn't have these issues.

We wouldn't have these issues if sick people didn't share pics of innocent kids, endangering their lives.

GarIT · 19-06-2019 10:26PM

anewme wrote: »

People recounting here in graphic detail what happened to Ana in that place is too much to bear.

Locals want it levelled, despite its history and I dont blame them.

What is the buildings history? And what's the story with it now? Has it been sealed off somehow, could someone just walk in and check it out?

mrjoneill · 19-06-2019 10:26PM

dickangel wrote: »

So how does one person get covered in DNA and the other have no trace at all?

He didn't do the actual "belting" or had a change of clothes as he carried a rucksack we don't know for what. Boy A & Boy B met shortly before they put the plan into operation, so both had rucksacks we can presume related to their plan. Boy B told an awful lot of lies, why tell so many & he has not told the truth yet. He don't tell us how Boys A semen got on Ana or her clothing. We do know Boy B was in the house when Ana was murdered as he indicated to Gardai where her body was found. Her body was moved from where she was killed. Boy B providing the adhesive tape was for to tie up Ana so he was well part of the plan

iamwhoiam · 19-06-2019 10:27PM

GarIT wrote: »

What is the buildings history? And what's the story with it now? Has it been sealed off somehow, could someone just walk in and check it out?

The windows and doors have been closed up with bricks since the tragedy

smurgen · 19-06-2019 10:29PM

dickangel wrote: »

Fail to see any logic there. The pic was taken from school pics taken a while back. Also, if you (for some reason) think pics of the boys can't exist while they're detained then what's the point in sending pics?

Well a vigilante isn't going to be harming an innocent bystander in error because the real perpetrator is now detained.do you understand what i am saying?

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

Comments