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

Cryptopagan · 20-06-2019 02:45PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Journalists all thought Joe O’Reilly wouldn’t be found guilty too or Graham Dwyer.
Thank God they’re not on juries.

The journalist isn’t saying he wouldn’t be found guilty; the piece was published after the case concluded. They are just pointing out that the case against Boy B was based largely on what he said to Gardai. That being so, had he said nothing to Gardai—as is anyone’s right—there is unlikely to have been enough evidence to charge him.

In contrast, Boy A told Gardai very little—frequently answering their questions with “I don’t know”, “no comment” and the like—but the case against him was largely based on physical evidence.

If Boy B reacted as Boy A did to questioning, he might never have even been tried.

sbsquarepants · 20-06-2019 02:45PM

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Can the parents be charged? Should they?

I've 2 kids and I'd hold myself largely responsible for their behaviour (whilst they live at home and are still "kids") so if one of them did something like this it would be 100% my fault and I should go to prison for a very long time.

Don't be ridiculous!

Grayson · 20-06-2019 02:46PM

80sChild wrote: »

I have a hard time believing they went from "Normal" to rape/torture/murder without even a hint of a dark side to their personalities. Much more likely to have been some indicators.

I see what you mean but that doesn't mean it was noticeable.

mrjoneill · 20-06-2019 02:46PM

volchitsa wrote: »

There's inevitably a lot of comparison with Venables and Thomson happening and one thing I wonder about is whether, Ireland's youth detention system being so much smaller than the UK's they will be able to remain in any sort of contact with each other. The two Bulger killers were kept apart, and I think it would be very unfortunate if that couldn't be guaranteed here. But I suspect it can't be.

Prob build them 2 bungalows in the grounds to keep them apart till 18 & then 2 different prisons where they will have to be segregated.

retro:electro · 20-06-2019 02:46PM

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Can the parents be charged? Should they?

I've 2 kids and I'd hold myself largely responsible for their behaviour (whilst they live at home and are still "kids") so if one of them did something like this it would be 100% my fault and I should go to prison for a very long time.

Why would their parents be arrested? The age of criminal responsibility in case like this is 10 years old.

Theboinkmaster · 20-06-2019 02:47PM

Priscilla Mushy Banner wrote: »

With what?

Accessory to murder. Why not?

Sunflower 27 · 20-06-2019 02:47PM

Boom_Bap wrote: »

He tried to have the evidence not be made available, for example, the boots with the blood, he was saying that they were acquired as part of a separate investigation.

Absolutely desperate

average_runner · 20-06-2019 02:47PM

Yurt! wrote: »

Because the baying mob can't control themselves? And we like to speak of individual responsibility in this society.

Looks like we're in the midst of a moral panic, and I'm not even joking. This is mass neurotic psychology at play here.

The Gardai did their job, the DPP did their job, the judge and jury did their job. It's not going to bring Ana back and justice isn't perfect, but it's the best we have. The two are going away in accordance with the laws of our state. Many online are looking for something beyond justice - and if they get the names of the family, it's not unreasonable to think they'll take retribution on behalf of a girl they never knew, never cared about until two days ago.

But the Yobs that want to take retribution already knows who they are.
Its not that hard to find out, its common knowledge in Leixlip and Lucan.

Faugheen · 20-06-2019 02:48PM

average_runner wrote: »

They are going have to release the identity or more innocent kids will get hurt in the wrong

Or grown adults can actually have some personal responsibility and cop the f*ck on.

Standman · 20-06-2019 02:48PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

I read that but I have to disagree. Patric Kriegel answered the door to him and we know now that both Boys A and B and indeed Ana were encountered by people known to them before and after the murder, as well as a decent amount of CCTV.

I'm not sure how he could have got away without being implicated in some fashion and had it come to it he would have been put on the stand and questioned, probably quite harshly by Boy A's counsel, seeking to add doubt about his own client if nothing else.

He can't be forced to take the stand. Again, there's the right to silence.

The fact alone that he called for Ana/was seen walking with her on CCTV is simply not enough to charge him for murder.

Theboinkmaster · 20-06-2019 02:48PM

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Don't be ridiculous!

I don't think it is.

These boys are mentally fvcked up - who is responsible for that? Their parents so I hold them ultimately responsible for this poor girls brutal murder.

average_runner · 20-06-2019 02:49PM

Faugheen wrote: »

Or grown adults can actually have some personal responsibility and cop the f*ck on.

haha, there is always a few idiots out there with no cop on

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 20-06-2019 02:49PM

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Accessory to murder. Why not?

Are you serious?

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 20-06-2019 02:50PM

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

I don't think it is.

These boys are mentally fvcked up - who is responsible for that? Their parents so I hold them ultimately responsible for this poor girls brutal murder.

How do you know the parents are responsible?

Yurt2 · 20-06-2019 02:50PM

average_runner wrote: »

But the Yobs that want to take retribution already knows who they are.
Its not that hard to find out, its common knowledge in Leixlip and Lucan.

There is a world outside Leixlip and Lucan. I don't know their names and I don't care to. The State has done a very good job in bringing them to justice in an extremely sensitive case. And that's the State's job, not Johnnyangryman on WhatsApp or Twitter.

retro:electro · 20-06-2019 02:50PM

Boom_Bap wrote: »

He tried to have the evidence not be made available, for example, the boots with the blood, he was saying that they were acquired as part of a separate investigation.

The defence tried every trick in the book to try and get a lot of the evidence deemed inadmissible, and a lot of their attempts were rejected. What’s great though is they literally couldn’t find fault with the Garda interviews or how the process of acquiring the info from Boy B was conducted, such is the professionalism that was shown on behalf of those interviewing. Stellar work in what I’m sure what was a highly frustrating environment.

tayto lover · 20-06-2019 02:52PM

Cryptopagan wrote: »

The journalist isn’t saying he wouldn’t be found guilty; the piece was published after the case concluded. They are just pointing out that the case against Boy B was based largely on what he said to Gardai. That being so, had he said nothing to Gardai—as is anyone’s right—there is unlikely to have been enough evidence to charge him.

In contrast, Boy A told Gardai very little—frequently answering their questions with “I don’t know”, “no comment” and the like—but the case against him was largely based on physical evidence.

If Boy B reacted as Boy A did to questioning, he might never have even been tried.

I still don’t agree and we will never know now anyway but the line of investigation would have taken a different direction and the detectives would have approached it in a different way if he had kept silent. I believe they suspected his guilt as soon as they saw the “look” between the two boys in the park. They knew they were not telling the truth.

Faugheen · 20-06-2019 02:53PM

average_runner wrote: »

haha, there is always a few idiots out there with no cop on

The ones who share photos falsely identifying one of the boys and then blaming the judiciary for not identifying them?

I agree. Absolute fools who think the law shouldn't have to apply to them.

mrjoneill · 20-06-2019 02:53PM

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

What is the maximum they can get?

life

average_runner · 20-06-2019 02:53PM

Yurt! wrote: »

There is a world outside Leixlip and Lucan. I don't know their names and I don't care to. The State has done a very good job in bringing them to justice in an extremely sensitive case. And that's the State's job, not Johnnyangryman on WhatsApp or Twitter.

Because you don't want to know. But if yobs really want to know, they are going to find out or attack an incident person!!

Nerdlingr · 20-06-2019 02:54PM

mrjoneill wrote: »

Gardai knew Boy B enticed Ana out of her house if they didn't know that the murder may not have been resolved so easily as it may have taken weeks for her body to be recovered & the DNA would have degenerated. Boy B had to explain his situation to avoid further Garda attention and the lies unfolded to deny what happened. I'm sure Boy A was flummoxed that Gardai knocked on his door the night she went missing fearing the whole thing unraveling. Boy A implicated Boy B who also tried to lie his way out of it. And they were able to look for CCTV & witnesses when they knew where A & B were. I understand A & B went around the local area together after the murder still best friends.

Her body was recovered without either boy's assistance. It was a missing person's case at the start so gardai were called in to look for her. Even without the knowledge of Boy B calling for her they still would have searched for Ana.

Theboinkmaster · 20-06-2019 02:54PM

Priscilla Mushy Banner wrote: »

How do you know the parents are responsible?

Parents are responsible for their own kids.

average_runner · 20-06-2019 02:55PM

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Parents are responsible for their own kids.

I dont think its that simple

Theboinkmaster · 20-06-2019 02:56PM

mrjoneill wrote: »

life

Yeah but they'll be out by the time they're 21.

The term "life" means nothing in this country.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 20-06-2019 02:56PM

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Parents are responsible for their own kids.

That doesn't mean they can control every eventuality. We don't know the circumstances, the influences on these children, what their parents were like, anything. They may have been bad parents or there may have been other factors at play.

Cryptopagan · 20-06-2019 02:58PM

tayto lover wrote: »

I still don’t agree and we will never know now anyway but the line of investigation would have taken a different direction and the detectives would have approached it in a different way if he had kept silent. I believe they suspected his guilt as soon as they saw the “look” between the two boys in the park. They knew they were not telling the truth.

And the reason they saw that look was because he was ostensibly cooperating with them. In the lead up to the boys exchanging that look, the officers had already noticed that Boy B was leading them along a different route to the one he previously claimed; his lies were already unraveling and giving him away.

Had he refused to cooperate or answer questions from the start, that certainly would have been very suspicious, but in the absence of witnesses or physical evidence putting him at the scene of the crime, it’s very hard to see what he could have been charged with. The investigation was exhaustive as it was—-you can’t pluck new evidence out of thin air.

sbsquarepants · 20-06-2019 02:58PM

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

I don't think it is.

These boys are mentally fvcked up - who is responsible for that? Their parents so I hold them ultimately responsible for this poor girls brutal murder.

Some people are just bad. Everything a child does is not the fault of the parents, that's just crazy!

You may well be lucky enough to have "normal" kids and have done a decent job rearing them - but a lot of how our kids behave is just inherent to them. Some kids are sweet and good natured, others are cold and calculating, and some are just plain bad eggs.

Parenting can help in some ways of course, or it can make things worse - but psychopaths are born that way, they can't be fixed!

Theboinkmaster · 20-06-2019 02:59PM

Priscilla Mushy Banner wrote: »

That doesn't mean they can control every eventuality. We don't know the circumstances, the influences on these children, what their parents were like, anything. They may have been bad parents or there may have been other factors at play.

So at what age does it end, the responsibility? How old must a kid be?

These were 14 - they were children still.

In general, in this country, a lot of parents do not accept the full responsibility of being parents properly and their kids end up utter scumbags or mentally deranged.

tuxy · 20-06-2019 02:59PM

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Parents are responsible for their own kids.

Not for murder, in Ireland when a child is over 10 years old they can be legally responsible for murder.
I don't believe there are any plans to bring the parents up on any charges for neglect, abuse or anything else.

Here's a Ted talk with Sue Klebold who was the mother of one of the Columbine shootings. Do you hold her responsible?

https://www.ted.com/talks/sue_klebold_my_son_was_a_columbine_shooter_this_is_my_story#t-113439

mrjoneill · 20-06-2019 02:59PM

Hal3000 wrote: »

Totally agree here. To a degree parents must be responsible for any child's access to the internet. Giving a child unfettered access to the internet is irresponsible. Also we need to look at limiting access to Whatsapp for u18. We are really going to cause damage to our youths if we allow them to keep viewing violent and extreme content. Im sure in years we will look back on this and think WTF we're we thinking.

We now are at the stage its compulsive porn viewing for 12yr old and swapping of such videos. While some parents can control their own kids access at home they have no controls in the school yard. I am aware of phone kids charging non-phone kids €2 to view this. Its like the jenie is out of the bottle and not going back in.

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

Comments