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

LiamoSail · 27-06-2019 11:25AM

mrjoneill wrote: »

What is standing by them, is it saying its ok what they did. Is unconditional love saying that. Quite honest I could never get my head around dealing with the perpetrator of such a criminal act esp what Boy A did. I see it different than gun crime typical of teenagers in the US, while it all ends up with the loss of life but shooting has a more remote aspect to it. Where someone kills one with beating them to death over a prolonged period after obv a pre-planning they cant be but sadistic and in this case a totally innocent naive victim.

If you bring a child into the world you have a responsibility to them. That doesn't end because you don't like how they turned out at the age of 13. Their parents do have a responsibility to do everything in their power to assist their child in reforming.

I'm not saying they should have acted as they did in aiding the deceit, just that the kids remain their responsibility and they have no right to walk away from that responsibility

Penn · 27-06-2019 11:29AM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I have nothing but respect & sympathy for the Kriegels and I am assuming they would have dealth with B's fathers outburst like water off a ducks back. Do I know that for sure? Of course not but judgeing by the strength and dignity they have shown throughout, I think it is safe to assume. It is also possible that B's father has since given them his apologies. We dont know & it is unfair to judge him.

Showing strength and dignity through the trial doesn't mean they're not just putting on a brave face. Either way, Boy B's father's reaction and outburst deserves to be condemned, and I think it's entirely fair to judge him on it.

LiamoSail · 27-06-2019 11:33AM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I have nothing but respect & sympathy for the Kriegels and I am assuming they would have dealth with B's fathers outburst like water off a ducks back. Do I know that for sure? Of course not but judgeing by the strength and dignity they have shown throughout, I think it is safe to assume. It is also possible that B's father has since given them his apologies. We dont know & it is unfair to judge him.

Apologies for his son brutally murdering their daughter? Or apologies for his son not divulging what he knew when Ana first was reported missing? Or apologies for his son never having given them the truth of how they lost their daughter? Or apologies for putting them through a trial rather than pleading guilty and avoiding it? Or apologies for his disgusting outburst? Or apologies for facilitating his sons cntinued deceit?

It's possible he has apologised, as you mention. Highly ****ing improbably though

iamwhoiam · 27-06-2019 11:42AM

Penn wrote: »

Showing strength and dignity through the trial doesn't mean they're not just putting on a brave face. Either way, Boy B's father's reaction and outburst deserves to be condemned, and I think it's entirely fair to judge him on it.

And the brave parents could have been deeply upset at his outburst .Sometimes its one moment that can cause awful trauma for people .

27-06-2019 12:08PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Eh no im not wrong. They will have their id's protected into adulthood

Eh yes you are. Into adulthood, as in they're children now. Which is why they're not being named. That's the only reason for the anonymity, they're minors.

iamwhoiam · 27-06-2019 12:11PM

Omackeral wrote: »

Eh yes you are. Into adulthood, as in they're children now. Which is why they're not being named. That's the only reason for the anonymity, they're minors.

Can I ask if a child commits a crime and has anonymity can the names be released at 18 ? Or must they remain anonymous if the crime was committed when a child ?

Stop moaning ffs · 27-06-2019 12:11PM

It’s weird we don’t have an exchange program with the uk or Europe for these cases. Put them overseas in youth detention there to protect their identities rather than them being transferred to mountjoy at 18 and a random Garda or prison guard alerting the press to their names and identities. Which is what will happen come the time.

Gadgetman496 · 27-06-2019 12:22PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Eh no im not wrong. They will have their id's protected into adulthood

Correct.

“The judicial comments on that have been that anonymity applies beyond the 18 years as well – a lifetime protection really, is the way judges described it in the past.

https://www.thejournal.ie/explainer-ana-kriegel-4681033-Jun2019/

tuxy · 27-06-2019 12:28PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

It’s weird we don’t have an exchange program with the uk or Europe for these cases. Put them overseas in youth detention there to protect their identities rather than them being transferred to mountjoy at 18 and a random Garda or prison guard alerting the press to their names and identities. Which is what will happen come the time.

On this thread anyone who mentions prison thinks they will go to Mountjoy at the age of 18, how do people know this already?
Won't Boy A probably be sent to Arbour Hill Prison because he was also found guilty of sexual assault?

Stop moaning ffs · 27-06-2019 12:30PM

tuxy wrote: »

On this thread anyone who mentions prison thinks they will go to Mountjoy at the age of 18, how do people know this already?
Won't Boy A probably be sent to Arbour Hill Prison because he was also found guilty of sexual assault?

Good point. Never thought of that.
They’re only minutes away from us regardless of the prison.
What comes after is the thing.
No way their identities remain secret when that transfer happens. If they are t revealed before then.

tuxy · 27-06-2019 12:32PM

Only pointed it out because some people seem to think they will get what's coming to them when they are 18 but I would think Arbour Hill would offer them protection. Or even if it's not Arbour Hill they won't be in with general population.

Stop moaning ffs · 27-06-2019 12:39PM

This is all assuming they won’t launch an appeal one or both of them.
This is where the greed of the lawyers comes in. They’ll do it just for the money and convince the families they have a case. When in reality we all know they do not. Neither of them.

mrjoneill · 27-06-2019 12:48PM

LiamoSail wrote: »

If you bring a child into the world you have a responsibility to them. That doesn't end because you don't like how they turned out at the age of 13. Their parents do have a responsibility to do everything in their power to assist their child in reforming.

I'm not saying they should have acted as they did in aiding the deceit, just that the kids remain their responsibility and they have no right to walk away from that responsibility

These monsters are now the responsibility of the state.

Gadgetman496 · 27-06-2019 12:48PM

tuxy wrote: »

On this thread anyone who mentions prison thinks they will go to Mountjoy at the age of 18, how do people know this already?
Won't Boy A probably be sent to Arbour Hill Prison because he was also found guilty of sexual assault?

The Midlands prison also houses sex offenders.

https://extra.ie/2018/01/28/news/irish-news/family-dublin-paedophile-matthew-horan-want-nothing

LiamoSail · 27-06-2019 01:09PM

mrjoneill wrote: »

These monsters are now the responsibility of the state.

And what about the parents? Things haven't turned out as they hoped so they get to just wash their hands and pass the buck on to the state alone?

That might be the easy option for them but as a parent to a child they have a responsibility to put their child's interests ahead of their own and that means doing everything possible to reform the child.

If you bring a child into the world you have a responsibility to them at least until they reach adulthood.

I don't mean they should condone the crime or seek to excuse their child of blame, but instead focus on the child's rehabilitation

tuxy · 27-06-2019 01:22PM

Contempt of court motion issued against the journalist that was on Red FM.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/journalist-alleged-to-have-named-one-of-ana-kri%C3%A9gel-s-killers-on-radio-1.3939343

Suckit · 27-06-2019 01:24PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

This is all assuming they won’t launch an appeal one or both of them.

I'm not sure, but I doubt Boy A could appeal. The case against him was faultless. I would imagine if he (or mayber either) tried to appeal it, and were still found guilty, the Judge might go even harsher on them for putting the Kriégels through that.

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Good point. Never thought of that.
They’re only minutes away from us regardless of the prison.
What comes after is the thing.
No way their identities remain secret when that transfer happens. If they are t revealed before then.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2019/0627/1057828-niall-o-connor/
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/journalist-alleged-to-have-named-one-of-ana-kri%C3%A9gel-s-killers-on-radio-1.3939343

From last week when the Journalist allegedly named one of them twice.
That recording is probably already in the wild (as are their names and photos anyway).

Neyite · 27-06-2019 02:07PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

It’s weird we don’t have an exchange program with the uk or Europe for these cases. Put them overseas in youth detention there to protect their identities rather than them being transferred to mountjoy at 18 and a random Garda or prison guard alerting the press to their names and identities. Which is what will happen come the time.

It's probably to do with their civil/ human rights to be able to receive visits from family members or friends while incarcerated.

Hannibal_Smith · 27-06-2019 02:21PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Something I have thought about is they must have approached her or spoken to her prior to B knocking into her. Then the video and pic on her phone of her tied to a chair and blindfolded. There’s a connection between those two things I’d say. Could they have put her up to it?

Mrs Kriegel had the password to Ana's phone and checked it regularly. So unless she deleted any messages, or it was all done in person, I don't think there is a connection in that respect

RoryMac · 27-06-2019 02:26PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

It’s weird we don’t have an exchange program with the uk or Europe for these cases. Put them overseas in youth detention there to protect their identities rather than them being transferred to mountjoy at 18 and a random Garda or prison guard alerting the press to their names and identities. Which is what will happen come the time.

The press already know their names, they would have been given in court which is why it was closed to the public.

If the judge has ordered them not to be released no newspaper will break that order

27-06-2019 02:44PM

RoryMac wrote: »

The press already know their names, they would have been given in court which is why it was closed to the public.

If the judge has ordered them not to be released no newspaper will break that order

Defo this. If you or me could get their names by firing off a few messages then any journalist worth their salt could too.

LollipopJimmy · 27-06-2019 02:44PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

It’s weird we don’t have an exchange program with the uk or Europe for these cases. Put them overseas in youth detention there to protect their identities rather than them being transferred to mountjoy at 18 and a random Garda or prison guard alerting the press to their names and identities. Which is what will happen come the time.

Nobody needs to leak their names to the press, the press are well aware already having had journalists in the courtroom and every other way possible. They simply can't publish their names or any identifying info.

Sure I saw their names and faces on FB the day of the verdict and so did thousands of other people

iamwhoiam · 27-06-2019 02:46PM

RoryMac wrote: »

The press already know their names, they would have been given in court which is why it was closed to the public.

If the judge has ordered them not to be released no newspaper will break that order

The dogs on the streets in Leixlip also know their names

washman3 · 27-06-2019 04:20PM

Neyite wrote: »

It's probably to do with their civil/ human rights to be able to receive visits from family members or friends while incarcerated.

Doubt if these 2 scrotes have any 'friends' that wish to visit them.

Actually if any parent in that area have teenagers that are still friends with these convicted murderers they urgently need to seek professional help for them.

Stop moaning ffs · 27-06-2019 05:45PM

I meant the press at the time when they turn 18 and get transferred. Nothin stopping the press at that time or any prison guards leaking it.

BattleCorp · 27-06-2019 06:11PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

I meant the press at the time when they turn 18 and get transferred. Nothin stopping the press at that time or any prison guards leaking it.

Contempt of court legislation would come down hard on anybody found to be leaking their names. Their names can't be released even when they turn 18. Their identity is protected for life.

mrjoneill · 27-06-2019 07:01PM

corpusvile wrote: »

I was attempting flippancy which doesn't always carry over well on the internet so my apologies.

According to Boy B it was a homework club which his schoolmates verified according to the IT article. A homework club with decidedly weird sounding rules re acting normally as if nothing happened but a homework club nonetheless with the Satanic thing just to dissuade others from joining. (As homework clubs are apparently very popular with today's teenagers with queues of prospective members probably out the door.)

To clarify I don't believe Satanism or the occult had anything to do with Ana's murder but I'd also take the homework club explanation with a grain of salt even if it was verified by other teens.

There are reports in other social media that there was an attempt to get more of their peers involved in the conspiracy to murder Ana's. There is also reports that these 2 made life hell in bullying Ana and were the main instigators. Could well be why Ana's mother Geraldine had all alarm bells going off when she found out who called for her.

mrjoneill · 27-06-2019 07:04PM

LiamoSail wrote: »

If you bring a child into the world you have a responsibility to them. That doesn't end because you don't like how they turned out at the age of 13. Their parents do have a responsibility to do everything in their power to assist their child in reforming.

I'm not saying they should have acted as they did in aiding the deceit, just that the kids remain their responsibility and they have no right to walk away from that responsibility

Would you sleep in the same house as Boy A with bedroom door open?

juno10353 · 27-06-2019 07:10PM

Did boy B tell his name to Ana's father, or how did parents know name to give police.

iamwhoiam · 27-06-2019 07:15PM

juno10353 wrote: »

Did boy B tell his name to Ana's father, or how did parents know name to give police.

As far as I remember Anas brother recognized him .

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

Comments