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

SirGerryAdams · 23-06-2019 10:20PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

yet again, only claimed to be in the room when he was in his 'it was all boy A, i saw the lot' version of his statement, originally he wasn't there at all and theres nobody else who can place him there at that time.

if he didn't know about it really then that would explain the garda calmness.

I don't think anyone will ever know what really happened there but as much as other people can post up "well i reckon he had gloves and also held her down" I can certainly entertain the theory that he dropped her off to boy A and thought they were going to 'talk' minced around the park for a while and either heard screams and ran home / went home without hearing a thing.

If you believe he wasn't there and left then why didn't he mention Boy A on the evening Ana disappeared? Only the next day did he mention Boy A.

His lies began right away when he said he last saw her in the park...when CCTV captured them walking to the house.

Also if a 13 year old didn't know anything bad happened to her, you'd think he'd be shocked and shaken by what happened. Instead, he was cool and calm all along!

Put yourself in a 13 year old body of an innocent boy. So you bring a girl to kiss another boy and you leave. That evening it turns out the girl is missing. Guards come and ask where you last saw her.

Does an innocent boy immediately lie? Why would you lie?

Eric Cartman · 23-06-2019 10:24PM

Suckit wrote: »

^^^here what?

you said the other 2 statements (where he's not in the house) were proven to be a lie by cctv and witness evidence, but then said theres no cctv or witness evidence of him being in the house. resolve that one.

Ash.J.Williams · 23-06-2019 10:26PM

Boy b seen laughing and skipping and jumping with ana on the way to her death, and said those horrible things about her in court. Sly little psychopath.

volchitsa · 23-06-2019 10:26PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you said the other 2 statements (where he's not in the house) were proven to be a lie by cctv and witness evidence, but then said theres no cctv or witness evidence of him being in the house. resolve that one.

He drew a picture of her in the house in the room where she was found. How else would he know that, if he hadn't been there?

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 23-06-2019 10:28PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

ok but what witness footage or cctv has him in the house at the time , surely that footage would have put a dead end to this of showing them all entering the house at the same time or the two boys leaving at the same time ?

if its witness evidence, how close were they , did they not hear the screams, what did they see ?

Will we do your research for you Eric?

No.

Eric Cartman · 23-06-2019 10:28PM

volchitsa wrote: »

He drew a picture of her in the house in the room where she was found. How else would he know that, if he hadn't been there?

you have been asked before to back that one up, ive heard nothing about that , but some of these statements are given weeks after the body was found and the story had broken , presumably the guy was familiar with the layout of the house having explored there before , thats not proof of anything really unless you can show me where that statement was taken off the kid 48 hours or less after the murder.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 23-06-2019 10:30PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you have been asked before to back that one up, ive heard nothing about that , but some of these statements are given weeks after the body was found and the story had broken , presumably the guy was familiar with the layout of the house having explored there before , thats not proof of anything really unless you can show me where that statement was taken off the kid 48 hours or less after the murder.

There was no mention of where the body was found until the court case. As far as I know.

I’m not 100% sure about the drawing though. Never heard that one.

Suckit · 23-06-2019 10:32PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you said the other 2 statements (where he's not in the house) were proven to be a lie by cctv and witness evidence, but then said theres no cctv or witness evidence of him being in the house. resolve that one.

I think you should read over again what I actually said, because nowhere did I say the other two statements were proven to be a lie by cctv and witness evidence. Nor did I say there's no cctv or witness evidence of him being in the house.

Are you just making stuff up to fit your own agenda and accusing people of doing the same?

pablo128 · 23-06-2019 10:32PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you have been asked before to back that one up, ive heard nothing about that , but some of these statements are given weeks after the body was found and the story had broken , presumably the guy was familiar with the layout of the house having explored there before , thats not proof of anything really unless you can show me where that statement was taken off the kid 48 hours or less after the murder.

You're coming across as extremely desperate to prove this fella is innocent. It means nothing. 12 grown adults on a jury have found him guilty of murder.

You are wasting your time.

Sardonicat · 23-06-2019 10:32PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you said the other 2 statements (where he's not in the house) were proven to be a lie by cctv and witness evidence, but then said theres no cctv or witness evidence of him being in the house. resolve that one.

He placed himself in the house. He was proven to be lying about his actions in the house when he drew a picture of Ana in the exact part of the room her body was found. He stated that this was where the attack began but forensics proved otherwise. It's not just that he lied. It's what his lies revealed. If he was innocent these lies don't make sense as lies borne out of fear of being implicated in the murder.

Suckit · 23-06-2019 10:35PM

I'm pretty sure this person is trolling, bored on a Sunday night.

tayto lover · 23-06-2019 10:36PM

Boy B is a murderer. Convicted. Guilty as sin.
Nothing more to discuss.
Hope he never gets out.

Gadgetman496 · 23-06-2019 10:37PM

What are all the web-sleuths trying to achieve here?

They were tried, found guilty and convicted.

The case is over.

The sentencing is all that remains.

Has nobody here figured that out after 268 pages?

AngeloArgue · 23-06-2019 10:42PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

He filed a statement that said he minced round the park and went home
He filed a statement that said he heard a scream and went home
He filed a statement that said he saw Boy A do the whole thing and on top of her raping her but provided no further detail about her state of undress or how exactly he was holding her or anything else at all . Yet statement 3 is definitely his truth and the other two are complete lies because thats how most people wanted it to be.

Could it be at the time he believed forensics would place him in the room? Just as CCTV had shown him leading Ana to the murder scene and returning 35 minutes later and changing his story to fit this evidence in. So he offered an admission of being in the room but continued to minimise his part in the death.
He also stated that on an earlier date he had been in the house and picked up a stick that matches closely the description of the murder weapon.
Did he believe, while making these admissions, that forensics would place him in the room and handling the murder weapon?

Eric Cartman · 23-06-2019 10:42PM

Im not trying to prove anyone innocent , they have boy A on all manor of evidence to convict him and rightly so,

I just wanted to know how boy B got over the line for a full blown murder charge , as I know now all circumstantial. From the arguments and points that come up here it very much seems like if he kept his mouth shut instead of lies that he may have gotten away with this , talked himself into a full blown murder conviction without even touching the victim (no proof of it, not saying it didnt happen) when theres very little other evidence against him

maebee · 23-06-2019 10:50PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im not trying to prove anyone innocent , they have boy A on all manor of evidence to convict him and rightly so,

I just wanted to know how boy B got over the line for a full blown murder charge , as I know now all circumstantial. From the arguments and points that come up here it very much seems like if he kept his mouth shut instead of lies that he may have gotten away with this , talked himself into a full blown murder conviction without even touching the victim (no proof of it, not saying it didnt happen) when theres very little other evidence against him

Boy B called to Ana's house and knowingly took her away to her death:(:(:(

mrjoneill · 23-06-2019 10:52PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

As somebody who grew up in leixlip , asking a girl to go up that park / getting a mate to do it for you to get stuck in or asking mates to go hang out around that area in that park was not in any way unusual behaviour. Going in to abandoned buildings for fun was not unusual behaviour.

The tape I have no idea, claimed it was for a project or something was what was officially said.

the lies in the statements make me believe its possible but a lot of this story equally sounds like a kid who was a patsy in boy A's sick plan. I don't think theres anything 'gullible' about asking for more detail on how the jury were thinking to get this over the line.

This was to an abandoned house 3km away. Boy B never associated with Ana before so he decides he will do his friend a favor and lead her to a remote abandoned house, not to hang out with but but so Boy A can tell her he don't want any assoc with. We do know that both Boy A and Boy B had no caring interest in Ana but disparaging. So why lead Ana on this journey? This being truthful from Boy B is too too far fetched for me. Boy B could simply told Ana at her door, Boy A doesn't want to be assoc with u. There it would have ended. They did not want to hang out with Ana so ur whole premise is wrong. Both Boy A and Boy B met just prior them separating in their different paths and its just not believable that a plan was not put into place at that meeting, a plan involving serious violence being done on Ana. Boy B was far from the village idiot according to his school he was smarts academically and would not have bought into this outlandish plan of Boy A out of nativity. Boy A and Boy B were childhood friends and its inconceivable they did not share their thoughts and part of such was the bullying of Ana.

SirGerryAdams · 23-06-2019 10:52PM

Boy B:

- unprompted, brought up that Boy A said he wanted to kill Ana a month before the attack.
- lied immediately as to where he last saw Ana while she was still a missing person
- Didn't mention Boy A until the next day
- Supplied the tape that was around her neck
- Was cool and calm in interviews, no sign of distress and spoke down on Ana saying she was someone he shouldn't be around.
- Changed story multiple times only when faced with facts and was caught out.

Remember Boy B said no one liked Ana and she was someone he shouldn't be around and also Boy A said he wanted to tell her he wasn't interested....

So if that was true, why walk 3km to tell her that? If that is what Boy A was going to tell Ana, why would Boy B walk back alone? Surely you'd wait for your friend and go together? How long would rejection have taken??

Why would boy B even agree to walk 3km so his friend could tell her he wasn't interested?

Effects · 23-06-2019 10:53PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

If he kept his mouth shut instead of lies that he may have gotten away with this, talked himself into a full blown murder conviction.

What does it matter if he could have got away with it or not? He's a murderer, and he got caught and punished for it.

There's a lot of talk about him actually planning the whole thing, and talking Boy A into doing it. If that's the case then he's more to blame, despite Boy A having a more physical role in the attack.

volchitsa · 23-06-2019 10:54PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you have been asked before to back that one up, ive heard nothing about that , but some of these statements are given weeks after the body was found and the story had broken , presumably the guy was familiar with the layout of the house having explored there before , thats not proof of anything really unless you can show me where that statement was taken off the kid 48 hours or less after the murder.

I haven't seen anyone asking for a link, and I can't remember which newspaper I saw it described exactly, but this one comes up with a mention of him drawing of the last place he saw Ana and Boy A

the corridor he picked up a "white plank" and looked into a room with a carpet but didn't see anything so he went outside.

Again, he said, he met Ana and Boy A who were now walking in. He followed them but, he said, Boy A told him he would be "ok", so Boy B left.

"That was the last time I saw [Boy A] and Ana that day."

Det Gda Daly asked Boy B to tell him "everything, everyone, every movement."

Boy B recounted the same movements and agreed with Det Gda Daly that the carpeted room was the one where Ana's body was found.

He described it again, saying: "First he started to choke her, then the jumper, then the shirt and just before he got to the bra I ran away and that is when I heard the scream."

He described it again, saying she was lying on the floor, Boy A was on top of her, choking her as he took off her clothes.

Boy B then drew a picture of what he remembered and signed it.

The drawing was shown to the jury by Det Gda Daly under examination by Brendan Grehan SC for the prosecution.

The point being that this room they called the carpeted room is indeed the room where her body was found, but is not the room where she was killed.
He got mixed up in all his lies.

SirGerryAdams · 23-06-2019 10:55PM

How did they know where Ana lived by the way?

SirGerryAdams · 23-06-2019 10:56PM

volchitsa wrote: »

I haven't seen anyone asking for a link, and I can't remember which newspaper I saw it described exactly, but this one comes up with a mention of him drawing of the last place he saw Ana and Boy A

The point being that this room they called the carpeted room is indeed the room where her body was found, but is not the room where she was killed.
He got mixed up in all his lies.

She was in the same room I thought???

Ash.J.Williams · 23-06-2019 10:57PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im not trying to prove anyone innocent , they have boy A on all manor of evidence to convict him and rightly so,

I just wanted to know how boy B got over the line for a full blown murder charge , as I know now all circumstantial. From the arguments and points that come up here it very much seems like if he kept his mouth shut instead of lies that he may have gotten away with this , talked himself into a full blown murder conviction without even touching the victim (no proof of it, not saying it didnt happen) when theres very little other evidence against him

Read some news?

Ash.J.Williams · 23-06-2019 10:58PM

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

How did they know where Ana lived by the way?

Meticulous stalking and planning..they chose ana .

mrjoneill · 23-06-2019 10:59PM

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

What are all the web-sleuths trying to achieve here?

They were tried, found guilty and convicted.

The case is over.

The sentencing is all that remains.

Has nobody here figured that out after 268 pages?

Glad for u have got to the bottom of it, but for most we haven't. Why would one boy that lives in a happy family situation be so cruel to lead another kid, a girl to a location where he knew she was to be seriously assaulted of murdered. And this was done by another boy who it appears came from a normal happy home. And this was done in a brutal ways with a serious sexual assault if not rape. These were 13 yr old boys.

tayto lover · 23-06-2019 11:04PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you said the other 2 statements (where he's not in the house) were proven to be a lie by cctv and witness evidence, but then said theres no cctv or witness evidence of him being in the house. resolve that one.

What are you looking for? Photographs?
Give over ffs.

Ash.J.Williams · 23-06-2019 11:10PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im not trying to prove anyone innocent , they have boy A on all manor of evidence to convict him and rightly so,

I just wanted to know how boy B got over the line for a full blown murder charge , as I know now all circumstantial. From the arguments and points that come up here it very much seems like if he kept his mouth shut instead of lies that he may have gotten away with this , talked himself into a full blown murder conviction without even touching the victim (no proof of it, not saying it didnt happen) when theres very little other evidence against him

CCTV sightings vs times whilst compared to statements

mrjoneill · 23-06-2019 11:11PM

El_Bee wrote: »

Remember that Boy B told a psychologist that he saw Boy A standing over Ana with his trousers opened, that was not admitted as evidence in the trial.

It was admitted at the trial, what he stated as recorded by the psychologist was when Boy A got up he realized the crotch of Boy A pants was open. Boy A was not wearing a pants but track-bottoms so the crotch could not be exposed unless the bottoms was rolled down over his backside. So why use the crotch exposed is baffling.

volchitsa · 23-06-2019 11:20PM

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

She was in the same room I thought???

The forensic report said her body was moved. i was posting from memory, and perhaps I'm wrong that it was from one room to another, it may have been just from one part of the room to another. The point was that his drawing showed her position after death, which contradicts his claim that he left before she died.

Suckit · 23-06-2019 11:28PM

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

Boy B:

- unprompted, brought up that Boy A said he wanted to kill Ana a month before the attack.
- lied immediately as to where he last saw Ana while she was still a missing person
- Didn't mention Boy A until the next day
- Supplied the tape that was around her neck
- Was cool and calm in interviews, no sign of distress and spoke down on Ana saying she was someone he shouldn't be around.
- Changed story multiple times only when faced with facts and was caught out.

Remember Boy B said no one liked Ana and she was someone he shouldn't be around and also Boy A said he wanted to tell her he wasn't interested....

So if that was true, why walk 3km to tell her that? If that is what Boy A was going to tell Ana, why would Boy B walk back alone? Surely you'd wait for your friend and go together? How long would rejection have taken??

Why would boy B even agree to walk 3km so his friend could tell her he wasn't interested?

From here

Boy A said he was in the park “for maybe a minute or two” when Boy B arrived. Boy B was in the company of Ana Kriegel.
Boy A, in his statement, said he knew Ana from school but did not know her well and that this was the first time he had been in the park with her.
He told gardaí that all three were walking very slowly and that he remembers talking to Boy B about video games, and that he wasn’t really talking to Ana.
The statement added that at one stage Ana said to him, ‘I have something to ask you’, and asked if he wanted to go out with her.
“I was surprised. It came out of nowhere. I did have an idea she liked me as she did kind of ask me out at the start of the school year,” he said in the statement.
I thought about it for a few minutes because I was going to say no and wanted to do it without hurting her feelings. I said to her that I was sorry but I wasn’t interested in her.”
Boy A said she didn’t answer and walked off soon afterwards. He said Ana looked annoyed and sad at the same time.
Boy A then turned to Boy B and said “that was a bit random” to which Boy B replied “yeah”.
It was then, according to Boy A, that they all parted ways.

There are so many contradictions in both of their stories it's ridiculous.

I wonder how detailed the Garda search of the house was. I would have searched everywhere in Boy B's house (and Boy A) for a phone hidden somewhere.

Obviously no evidence of them having been in contact with one another after she was murdered, but the next morning when the Gardaí noticed 'the look' both Boy A and Boy B had the story that Boy A had been attacked by two men, I didn't see how Boy B had heard that.

Out of curiosity, was Ana's phone recovered?

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

Comments