Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

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

1…7980828485…247

Comments

  • #2432
    tuxy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,980 ✭✭✭✭tuxy


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Yeah that's what he said alright. He's also a proven liar. If you knew you had an incriminating video on your phone, would you hand it over to the Gardai, or even admit having a phone?

    No but I also wouldn't go making up "facts" about a murder case when there was actual real evidence that was sufficient to get a conviction.

    We know that Boy B have been given two phones by his Dad but lost them well before the murder.


  • #2433
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    tuxy wrote: »
    No but I also wouldn't go making up "facts" about a murder case when there was actual real evidence that was sufficient to get a conviction.

    Tbf that theory deos seem alot more plausible that any explaination put forward by that boy b



    Its not a fact,but i wouldnt discount it either


  • #2434
    Happy4all
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,089 ✭✭✭Happy4all


    The 2 phones Boy B lost, would it be possible to find out how recently they were used?


  • #2435
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,210 ✭✭✭pablo128


    tuxy wrote: »
    No but I also wouldn't go making up "facts" about a murder case when there was actual real evidence that was sufficient to get a conviction.

    Makes no odds to me. They are already convicted and will hopefully serve a long sentence.

    You would be naive though to think that they planned all this and didn't record it.


  • #2436
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,992 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    tuxy wrote: »
    I have no idea what phones you are talking about, there is no report of phones going missing after the fact.

    Boy B had no phone on him and used Ana's phone to check the time at one stage. They had no problem getting Boy A's phone and they found out what he had been searching for.

    Boy B's father claimed his son had no interest in social media etc and had managed to lose two phones given to him ...

    Boy B maybe had this better thought out that his friend ...


  • Advertisement
  • #2437
    mrjoneill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 536 ✭✭✭mrjoneill


    Wombatman wrote: »
    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.



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

    From the IT Article


    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?


    Boy B enticed Ana to a derelict isolated house 3km from her home. It was not to a public park but an isolated house. Boy A, his friend is linked by strong forensic to the murder and we know from forensics he went equipped to kill. Boy B has a lot of explaining to do to establish his innocence in it. But he has lied & lied & the only reason for the repeated lying & the degrading of the victim is manipulation to get around his own active involvement. Over 2 days of questioning by experienced Gardai he did not crack but gave another lie to cover for external evidence. We do know he was present at the murder scene till the end as he drew on sketch where Ana's body was found. Ana's body was moved after she was killed as the blood spatter pattern indicates.


  • #2438
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,210 ✭✭✭pablo128


    tuxy wrote: »
    No but I also wouldn't go making up "facts" about a murder case when there was actual real evidence that was sufficient to get a conviction.

    We know that Boy B have been given two phones by his Dad but lost them well before the murder.

    And how do we know they were lost well before the murder? Have we actual real evidence of this?


  • #2439
    tuxy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,980 ✭✭✭✭tuxy


    I've no idea what people are trying to get at with these phantom phones.
    There was enough evidence to convict both boys so unless someone thinks these phantom phones could be used to appeal the guilty verdict all you are doing is making useless speculation about a very sensitive murder trial.


  • #2440
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    tupenny wrote: »
    If you people lived locally to this you would not defend the parents

    Do you know them?


  • #2441
    Happy4all
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,089 ✭✭✭Happy4all


    tupenny wrote: »
    If you people lived locally to this you would not defend the parents

    If they were covering up the truth and justice for a murdered girl? No

    If they were getting the child to face the truth and learn remorse? Yes


  • Advertisement
  • #2442
    punisher5112
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,519 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    The whole thing is so shocking and sad and something that has ruined numerous lives....

    I just can't understand why another human wants to harm another especially in the case of this one....

    The young girl has lost what would hopefully have been a food life but was ruined with all the crap she had to put up with in school, I had to deal with very similar bullying daily but I've come out ok from it thankfully....

    Such a sad case and all I can say is I really feel for her and her family and condolences to all and her friends....

    My heart goes out to them....


  • #2443
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,210 ✭✭✭pablo128


    tuxy wrote: »
    I've no idea what people are trying to get at with these phantom phones.
    There was enough evidence to convict both boys so unless someone thinks these phantom phones could be used to appeal the guilty verdict all you are doing is making useless speculation about a very sensitive murder trial.

    Yes. This is a discussion forum. We can speculate as it won't affect the verdict.


  • #2444
    Onthebus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 47 ✭Onthebus


    Perhaps the judge should wait in the court room after passing sentence and hear what the parents of Boy A and Boy B are going to shout out to the court and investigating gardai.

    Then the judge should jail them too!

    You can see where the boys got it from!!


  • #2445
    Will I Am Not
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,496 ✭✭✭Will I Am Not


    No chance in this day and age that he had a phone and gardaí couldn’t verify it.


  • #2446
    Dante7
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,542 ✭✭✭Dante7


    .


  • #2447
    Larbre34
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,811 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Lets put to bed any ambiguity about Boy B.

    "The doctrine of common purpose, common design, joint enterprise, or joint criminal enterprise is a common-law legal doctrine that imputes criminal liability to the participants in a criminal enterprise for all that results from that enterprise."

    In other words, without the participation of Boy B, Ana likely wouldn't have been in that building on that particular occasion. She was killed there, so Boy B goes down for common design.

    And the reason it is a conviction of Murder and not anything else for him?

    If you and I randomly cross paths in a chipper on a night out, get into a disagreement and it escalates into physicals and I fall and bang my head and die, you will be charged with Manslaughter, because there was no malice aforethought, you planned no part of it and that distinguishes murder from other unlawful killing.

    However, if you know me and decide for whatever reason that I warrant a beating for some apparent transgression and even though you don't intend me to die, but I do happen to die as a result, the charge will be murder. Death as a result of any preplanned harm, even that not intended to result in death, is Murder.

    And so whether or not Boy A did really intend Ana to die that day is irrelevant, he did plan and intend her to be harmed and because she died as a result, its murder. The contributory actions of Boy B, under common design, are assessed no differently and so its a murder for him too.

    I do hope detention is a very unpleasant experience for them both.


  • #2448
    tuxy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,980 ✭✭✭✭tuxy


    Will I Am Not wrote: »
    No chance in this day and age that he had a phone and gardaí couldn’t verify it.

    That's exactly what I was thinking and after the excellent job the Garda did on this case I think it's an insult to start claiming they were negligent at this stage.


  • #2449
    Wombatman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,349 ✭✭✭Wombatman


    mrjoneill wrote: »
    Boy B enticed Ana to a derelict isolated house 3km from her home. It was not to a public park but an isolated house. Boy A, his friend is linked by strong forensic to the murder and we know from forensics he went equipped to kill. Boy B has a lot of explaining to do to establish his innocence in it. But he has lied & lied & the only reason for the repeated lying & the degrading of the victim is manipulation to get around his own active involvement. Over 2 days of questioning by experienced Gardai he did not crack but gave another lie to cover for external evidence. We do know he was present at the murder scene till the end as he drew on sketch where Ana's body was found. Ana's body was moved after she was killed as the blood spatter pattern indicates.

    None of this would prove that he murdered Ana.

    Boy B does not need to establish his innocence, the prosecution needs to prove he is guilty, not of misleading, or lying or obstructing justice, or shaming Ana, guilty of murder.

    Let's say proof came to light (text messages for example) that Boy B believed that Boy A was planning to rape Ana in the house, and that Boy B facilitated this plan, would he still be guilty of murder?


  • #2450
    Aisling_Dublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9 ✭Aisling_Dublin


    mrjoneill wrote: »
    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.

    Cctv footage got the boy, so they would have been caught sooner or later.


  • #2451
    anewme
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,195 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    Happy4all wrote: »
    tupenny wrote: »
    If you people lived locally to this you would not defend the parents

    If they were covering up the truth and justice for a murdered girl? No

    If they were getting the child to face the truth and learn remorse? Yes

    Ana's violent death is not a step by step dummies guide tutiorial in facing the truth and learning remorse.


  • Advertisement
  • #2452
    Wombatman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,349 ✭✭✭Wombatman


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    Lets put to bed any ambiguity about Boy B.

    "The doctrine of common purpose, common design, joint enterprise, or joint criminal enterprise is a common-law legal doctrine that imputes criminal liability to the participants in a criminal enterprise for all that results from that enterprise."

    In other words, without the participation of Boy B, Ana likely wouldn't have been in that building on that particular occasion. She was killed there, so Boy B goes down for common design.

    And the reason it is a conviction of Murder and not anything else for him?

    If you and I randomly cross paths in a chipper on a night out, get into a disagreement and it escalates into physicals and I fall and bang my head and die, you will be charged with Manslaughter, because there was no malice aforethought, you planned no part of it and that distinguishes murder from other unlawful killing.

    However, if you know me and decide for whatever reason that I warrant a beating for some apparent transgression and even though you don't intend me to die, but I do happen to die as a result, the charge will be murder. Death as a result of any preplanned harm, even that not intended to result in death, is Murder.

    And so whether or not Boy A did really intend Ana to die that day is irrelevant, he did plan and intend her to be harmed and because she died as a result, its murder. The contributory actions of Boy B, under common design, are assessed no differently and so its a murder for him too.

    I do hope detention is a very unpleasant experience for them both.

    You are misinterpreting. Common purpose means all parties are acting towards the same end.

    If a taxi drives you to a house where you commit a crime, but the taxi driver has no knowledge of your intention, there is no guilt attributable to the driver.

    If the driver knows what you plan to do, and still brings you there, then the guilt is shared.


  • #2453
    SirChenjin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,111 ✭✭✭SirChenjin


    Omackeral wrote: »
    ''Geraldine and Patric Kriegel remained throughout the testimony of Prof Marie Cassidy as she dispassionately described the autopsy process and the injuries inflicted on Ana. (Boys A and B were both excused from court that day because of the graphic nature of the evidence.


    This is so f*cking wrong    .

    +1.
    So so ****ing wrong. I remember thinking that when the trial was in progress.

    Cannot even begin to imagine how Ana's parents felt. There are no words.

    And that pair excused from listening...

    Once again, all I can say is fair play to the gardai and anyone who helped to bring them to trial and to see justice served.

    Nothing will bring that beautiful child back and her parents and family will have to try to live with their terrible loss. I wish them every strength.


  • #2454
    Hoboo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,866 ✭✭✭Hoboo


    Wombatman wrote: »
    You are misinterpreting. Common purpose means all parties are acting towards the same end.

    If a taxi drives you to a house where you commit a crime, but the taxi driver has no knowledge of your intention, there is no guilt attributable to the driver.

    If the driver knows what you plan to do, and still brings you there, then the guilt is shared.

    I think they meant that boy b knew harm would come to her, and although he might not have known murder was the plan, he knew harm would come. So they both acted towards the same end, albeit one possibly knowing murder would be the end result. And by knowing harm would come, because murder is the result, murder is the charge.


  • #2455
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,182 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    TBH I personally will give this a week from now, and then it will all move on.

    We will all forget it soon enough, but the parents of Ana will never be able to forget.


  • #2456
    Ace Attorney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,320 ✭✭✭Ace Attorney


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    TBH I personally will give this a week from now, and then it will all move on.

    We will all forget it soon enough, but the parents of Ana will never be able to forget.

    until the sentencing next month


  • #2457
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,182 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Ace Attorney wrote: »
    until the sentencing next month

    So what. Sentencing may be controversial, but who knows?

    All forgotten in time anyway, we all move on.


  • #2458
    mrjoneill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 536 ✭✭✭mrjoneill


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    Lets put to bed any ambiguity about Boy B.

    "The doctrine of common purpose, common design, joint enterprise, or joint criminal enterprise is a common-law legal doctrine that imputes criminal liability to the participants in a criminal enterprise for all that results from that enterprise."

    In other words, without the participation of Boy B, Ana likely wouldn't have been in that building on that particular occasion. She was killed there, so Boy B goes down for common design.

    And the reason it is a conviction of Murder and not anything else for him?

    If you and I randomly cross paths in a chipper on a night out, get into a disagreement and it escalates into physicals and I fall and bang my head and die, you will be charged with Manslaughter, because there was no malice aforethought, you planned no part of it and that distinguishes murder from other unlawful killing.

    However, if you know me and decide for whatever reason that I warrant a beating for some apparent transgression and even though you don't intend me to die, but I do happen to die as a result, the charge will be murder. Death as a result of any preplanned harm, even that not intended to result in death, is Murder.

    And so whether or not Boy A did really intend Ana to die that day is irrelevant, he did plan and intend her to be harmed and because she died as a result, its murder. The contributory actions of Boy B, under common design, are assessed no differently and so its a murder for him too.

    I do hope detention is a very unpleasant experience for them both.


    And may I add for a very long time. I presume their release will be on license since the conviction is murder.

    All has to be satisfied to implicate Boy B was that assault was know to him when he lured her to the abandoned house. Sure there is no other way of explaining away there was a common plan, they were friends, had met up prior to Boy B going to Ana's home, Boy B gave Boy A or brought to the site adhesive tape to tie up Ana, Boy B lured her to abandoned house 3km away where Boy A waited in killing gear.There are too many strands for it to be innocent. For Boy B he believed he was smarter than everyone else his lies could give an innocent explanation, but he ended up doing the contrary.


  • #2459
    mrjoneill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 536 ✭✭✭mrjoneill


    tuxy wrote: »
    I have no idea what phones you are talking about, there is no report of phones going missing after the fact.

    Boy B had no phone on him and used Ana's phone to check the time at one stage. They had no problem getting Boy A's phone and they found out what he had been searching for.


    Boy B father state his son lost 2 mobile phones he gave him to portray a bumbling fool & stated he was very immature for his age as well as craved friendship also to portray his darling son as a pawn of the Big Bad Boy A.


  • #2460
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    TBH I personally will give this a week from now, and then it will all move on.

    We will all forget it soon enough, but the parents of Ana will never be able to forget.
    I don't know why you're being so glib.

    It's in poor taste.

    You can speak only for yourself.

    Personally I think this will stay raw for a long time.


  • Advertisement
  • #2461
    theballz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭theballz


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    TBH I personally will give this a week from now, and then it will all move on.

    We will all forget it soon enough, but the parents of Ana will never be able to forget.

    The media will stop printing it, the thread won’t be trending but people will not forget. I cannot sleep tonight thinking about story and many parents not just in Ireland but around the world will be deeply deeply saddened by this tragic event and loss of a child.

    You may forget. I know for certain I definitely won’t.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement