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

Hannibal_Smith · 01-07-2019 03:31PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I have nothing but respect for the Kriegels. If anyone is being disrespectful it is the people wishing incarceration and physical harm on the innocent parents & immediate family of the convicted.

I think you've been more than disrespectful to the Kreigels with some of the things you've posted, particularly about Ana's dad

Kidchameleon · 01-07-2019 03:42PM

corpusvile wrote: »

How are they in danger of vigilante attack when they're in Oberstown? Up to the state now to protect them & any other prisoners within the system from attacks in general & if they are attacked in prison it's no different than any other prisoner being attacked, as I'm quite sure prisons are potentially violent places in general. But both boys are hardly in danger of vigilante attacks when they're in custody.

Having them named increases the likelihood they will be attacked & puts their innocent family at risk.

iamwhoiam · 01-07-2019 03:47PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I have nothing but respect for the Kriegels.

You seem to have no self awareness as to how you are coming across .

8-10 · 01-07-2019 03:49PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

In all fairness the journalists were warned on numerous occasions not to name them . I was on the panel for jury service on a rape case . We were told everyday not to name her , we were warned not to discuss the case even at home . This was stressed every single day

Yep same for me on one of the juries I was on, lower profile of a case than this one but all the media reported just the defendant's age and town he was living in. Nothing identifying like occupation or name.

Even after conviction it wasn't to be revealed and the judge (Paul Carney who was pretty intimidating) was crystal clear that he'd have anyone of us who mentioned his name dragged up in front of him in contempt

Suckit · 01-07-2019 04:08PM

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mental-health-professionals-may-interview-parents-of-ana-kriegels-murderers-court-hears-934031.html

Mental health professionals may interview parents of Ana Kriegel's murderers, court hears

Mental health professionals assessing the two boys convicted of murdering 14-year-old schoolgirl Ana Kriegel may interview the boys' parents, the Central Criminal Court heard today.
The boys, referred to as Boy A and Boy B because they are minors, were convicted of Ana's murder last month following a trial at the Central Criminal Court.
Ana's body was found in an abandoned house at Laraghcon, Clonee Road, Lucan on May 17, 2018. She had been murdered three days earlier.
Boy A was also convicted of Ana's aggravated sexual assault in a manner that involved serious violence to her.
Following conviction Mr Justice Paul McDermott ordered probation reports and psychiatric reports by child forensic psychiatrists for both boys.
Brendan Grehan SC on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions today told Mr Justice McDermott that Professor Harry Kennedy of the National Forensic Mental Health Service had written to the court with three suggestions that would help in complying with the court orders.

Professor Kennedy suggested joint assessments for each boy by consultant child psychiatrists and consultant forensic psychiatrists. He also suggested assessments to be carried out by clinical psychologists with appropriate expertise.
Thirdly, he said it would be "helpful" if the clinicians involved could interview the boys' parents and have access to relevant prior reports and any reports or assessments carried out since their detention began.

Patrick Gageby SC on behalf of Boy A said it is not clear whether the Central Mental Hospital or the Health Service Executive have a consultant forensic psychiatrist specialising in child and adolescent matters on their books.
He said he is aware of such a specialist in the UK and would be happy to put his name forward to Professor Kennedy. Damien Colgan SC, representing Boy B, said his client has "no difficulty with what is suggested".
Mr Justice McDermott said he accepts the recommendations made by Professor Kennedy, "because he is the expert".

Justice McDermott also asked for a report outlining what educational facilities are available to the boys while they are detained.

corpusvile · 01-07-2019 04:42PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Having them named increases the likelihood they will be attacked & puts their innocent family at risk.

You don't know that or what protocols are put in place for prisoners in general or for particularly high profile ones such as these. Again it's up to the prison authorities to prevent attacks on all prisoners.
You don't know that it puts them at risk either, plenty of murderers families suffered no vigilante attacks.

Kidchameleon · 01-07-2019 04:50PM

corpusvile wrote: »

You don't know that or what protocols are put in place for prisoners in general or for particularly high profile ones such as these. Again it's up to the prison authorities to prevent attacks on all prisoners.
You don't know that it puts them at risk either, plenty of murderers families suffered no vigilante attacks.

And it is up to the legal system to work in conjunction with the prison authorities to make sure their job runs as smoothly as possible. Not many murder cases are as high profile and triggering as this one. Look at some of the posts here in this thread for examples of the risks these boys and their family's are faced with. B's family have already been attacked and had to move from their family home. The judge in this case seems to agree with my opinion that they should not be named and I will take his expert side if you don't mind.

Beechwoodspark · 01-07-2019 05:16PM

corpusvile wrote: »

I took it to mean highly strung, I've never heard of anyone referring to people on drugs as being "high" in Ireland, actually.

Ok well I’ve heard it countless times I would say at least weekly for the past 20 years referring to drug intoxication.

According to the article the officer said “he’s too high”. Not “loud”

splinter65 · 01-07-2019 05:32PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I have nothing but respect for the Kriegels. If anyone is being disrespectful it is the people wishing incarceration and physical harm on the innocent parents & immediate family of the convicted.

We are on page 402 of this thread and 2 or 3 posters at most made at the most 10 posts wishing harm on the families of the two wicked murderers. The rest of the posters and the posts have been speculative as to the murders and the murderers.
For some reason you’ve decided that even as Ana is lying in her grave, her life ended by two exceptionally depraved little boys, that not only does the father of boy b not bear any responsibility for his minor child’s depravity, despite being the alpha male role model in his short life, but that he’s somehow at least, if not more, deserving of sympathy then Ana’s “dad” (your inverted commas).
According to you, Ana’s dad has to take some responsibility for Anas brutal death because as her alpha male he let her down by allowing her out to play on a bright summers afternoon.
But somehow boy bs dad doesn’t bear any responsibility at all for his child?!?
How does that work exactly

BarryD2 · 01-07-2019 06:32PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

In all fairness the journalists were warned on numerous occasions not to name them . I was on the panel for jury service on a rape case . We were told everyday not to name her , we were warned not to discuss the case even at home . This was stressed every single day

That maybe the case above and in that case presumably this was to protect the identity of the victim, which is pretty reasonable.

The case in hand though is quite the outlier. These young citizens convicted of murder have been given anonymity. I would think that when the legislation surrounding the protection of minors was brought in, that the transgressions envisaged were to be generally of a lesser nature. No ordinary case this, thank goodness.

iamwhoiam · 01-07-2019 06:36PM

BarryD2 wrote: »

That maybe the case above and in that case presumably this was to protect the identity of the victim, which is pretty reasonable.

The case in hand though is quite the outlier. These young citizens convicted of murder have been given anonymity. I would think that when the legislation surrounding the protection of minors was brought in, that the transgressions envisaged were to be generally of a lesser nature. No ordinary case this, thank goodness.

Agreed . Though the journalists was careless with the law regardless if we agree with it or not
My issue with the anonymity for two underage boys was that Ana , an underage girl , was not afforded the same . Her life and its struggles and her horrendous death was on every paper and media around the world

RIP Ana

Cryptopagan · 01-07-2019 06:38PM

BarryD2 wrote: »

That maybe the case above and in that case presumably this was to protect the identity of the victim, which is pretty reasonable.

The case in hand though is quite the outlier. These young citizens convicted of murder have been given anonymity. I would think that when the legislation surrounding the protection of minors was brought in, that the transgressions envisaged were to be generally of a lesser nature. No ordinary case this, thank goodness.

Not at all. The legislation states clearly that the only circumstances in which anonymity can be removed is either to prevent injustice to the child in question, or when it’s necessary to apprehend the child (if they are at large). They included provisions when the Court could set aside anonymity, and the seriousness of any offense involved is not one of them.

Stop moaning ffs · 01-07-2019 06:40PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Agreed . Though the journalists was careless with the law regardless if we agree with it or not
My issue with the anonymity for two underage boys was that Ana , an underage girl , was not afforded the same . Her life and its struggles and her horrendous death was on every paper and media around the world

RIP Ana

The anonymity is for their families protection in the immediate. Not theirs.

Mob mentality is a real thing and according to several in fact many posters here, everyone in the area and surrounds knows the boys names and families and where they live.

It doesn’t take a mob. It just takes one deranged idiot to attack them on the street or in their homes.

We can’t let that happen.

I’m all for publishing their names once they’re released. They’ll probably be given new identities and moved out of the state anyways and people for the most part won’t remember the case. But let’s see.

Right now though the families protection and anonymity is paramount.

iamwhoiam · 01-07-2019 06:51PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

The anonymity is for their families protection in the immediate. Not theirs.

Mob mentality is a real thing and according to several in fact many posters here, everyone in the area and surrounds knows the boys names and families and where they live.

It doesn’t take a mob. It just takes one deranged idiot to attack them on the street or in their homes.

We can’t let that happen.

I’m all for publishing their names once they’re released. They’ll probably be given new identities and moved out of the state anyways and people for the most part won’t remember the case. But let’s see.

Right now though the families protection and anonymity is paramount.

My point made was not about the boys anonymity but about Anas . She was not afforded the same right as the boys were
Though it can be argued that the boys anonymity is not just for their families it is also for them and their protection in the future
Personally I think they should be named at age 18 so we can all protect our daughters and loved ones from their barbarity .

Cryptopagan · 01-07-2019 06:55PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

My point made was not about the boys anonymity but about Anas . She was not afforded the same right as the boys were
Though it can be argued that the boys anonymity is not just for their families it is also for them and their protection in the future
Personally I think they should be named at age 18 so we can all protect our daughters and loved ones from their barbarity .

She was a missing person at one point, so she was identified then. And you can’t really preserve someone’s anonymity after they are gone, since acknowledging a person’s passing is a public thing, the funeral, notices, all that. From what I’ve read and seen the media has struck a decent balance between reporting the details of her last hours, and giving time and space to acknowledge that she was a person and not just a victim.

Suckit · 01-07-2019 07:01PM

The Boys anonymity is not for the protection of their family. It is because they are children.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2001/act/24/section/252/enacted/en/html#sec252
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

I hadn't realised the judge could sentence them to life imprisonment.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/children-charged-with-serious-crimes-face-different-criminal-justice-process-to-adults-1.3508849

Mandatory sentences

Some offences carry mandatory sentences. Murder carries a mandatory life sentence, while possession of large amounts of drugs is punishable by a presumptive mandatory minimum of 10 years.

The Children’s Act is silent on mandatory sentences, but the legal consensus is they don’t apply to children even in cases of murder.

Judges can sentence a child to life imprisonment but it is not required. For example, in 2005 Mr Justice Barry White sentenced a 15-year-old boy to life imprisonment for murder, but ordered the sentence be brought before him again in a decade for review. In 2014 he reviewed the sentence, and set a release date for 2016.

This approach to sentencing was appealed by both the child and the DPP, but the Appeal Court ruled it was appropriate.

iamwhoiam · 01-07-2019 07:01PM

Cryptopagan wrote: »

She was a missing person at one point, so she was identified then. And you can’t really preserve someone’s anonymity after they are gone, since acknowledging a person’s passing is a public thing, the funeral, notices, all that. From what I’ve read and seen the media has struck a decent balance between reporting the details of her last hours, and giving time and space to acknowledge that she was a person and not just a victim.

I thought most of the media were quite decent . But details of Anas struggles etc were occasionally over reported . Just my instinct to protect a young girl I suppose would have preferred not to have such details public

McCrack · 01-07-2019 07:05PM

I understand reports are being prepared on both murderers which possibly will not be completed in time for the 15th next so sentencing could be deferred

pablo128 · 01-07-2019 07:08PM

McCrack wrote: »

I understand reports are being prepared on both murderers which possibly will not be completed in time for the 15th next so sentencing could be deferred

Yeah and it looks like both sets of parents will be interviewed as part of it.
https://www.thejournal.ie/boy-a-boy-b-parents-4705267-Jul2019/

dudara · 01-07-2019 09:32PM

@gozunda & knucklehead6 - That’s enough. Stop it now.

If either of you have a problem with a post, use the Report Post function. Do not start bickering on thread.

dudara

careless sherpa · 01-07-2019 09:49PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

The anonymity is for their families protection in the immediate. Not theirs.

Mob mentality is a real thing and according to several in fact many posters here, everyone in the area and surrounds knows the boys names and families and where they live.

It doesn’t take a mob. It just takes one deranged idiot to attack them on the street or in their homes.

We can’t let that happen.

I’m all for publishing their names once they’re released. They’ll probably be given new identities and moved out of the state anyways and people for the most part won’t remember the case. But let’s see.

Right now though the families protection and anonymity is paramount.

What state would want them upon release?

Vicarious Function · 01-07-2019 10:31PM

careless sherpa wrote: »

What state would want them upon release?

The answer to that is fairly obvious.

I guess the only way to secure an arrangement like this would be if we are prepared to return the "favour" by taking one or two equally undesirable individuals from that country.

How many murders have we seen already in this country which have been done by "Non-nationals" who have committed murders in their original country before coming here? Were we maybe sheltering them under a secret arrangement? Who knows!

tuxy · 01-07-2019 10:48PM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

How many murders have we seen already in this country which have been done by "Non-nationals" who have committed murders in their original country before coming here? Were we maybe sheltering them under a secret arrangement? Who knows!

Well it's either some kind of agreements with other countries or incompetence.
Freedom of movement is one of the fundamental rights of being an EU citizen but people can still be rejected from entering a country if they are deemed to be a danger to the public.

volchitsa · 02-07-2019 06:59AM

tuxy wrote: »

Well it's either some kind of agreements with other countries or incompetence.
Freedom of movement is one of the fundamental rights of being an EU citizen but people can still be rejected from entering a country if they are deemed to be a danger to the public.

It's also only FoM within the EU. People from other countries won't have come in under that rule.

(Unless of course they have EU resident status, but I assume a criminal conviction should have been flagged up when they requested it.)

8-10 · 02-07-2019 07:15AM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

The answer to that is fairly obvious.

? Not to all of us, where are you talking about?

02-07-2019 08:10AM

8-10 wrote: »

? Not to all of us, where are you talking about?

I'd assume "nowhere" is what the poster is referring to hence why we'd need to do an exchange to offload them.

8-10 · 02-07-2019 09:20AM

Omackeral wrote: »

I'd assume "nowhere" is what the poster is referring to hence why we'd need to do an exchange to offload them.

Ahh yep got it now thanks, I'm a bit slow in the morning

Road-Hog · 02-07-2019 09:22PM

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Not at all. The legislation states clearly that the only circumstances in which anonymity can be removed is either to prevent injustice to the child in question, or when it’s necessary to apprehend the child (if they are at large). They included provisions when the Court could set aside anonymity, and the seriousness of any offense involved is not one of them.

What was the basis for publishing the names and pictures of Jamie Bulgers killers.....? I’m old enough to remember the case vividly but don’t recall the legal arguments put forward for revealing their names and faces to the world....!

abff · 02-07-2019 09:42PM

Road-Hog wrote: »

What was the basis for publishing the names and pictures of Jamie Bulgers killers.....? I’m old enough to remember the case vividly but don’t recall the legal arguments put forward for revealing their names and faces to the world....!

Differences between Irish and English/UK law, presumably? Also, it was a long time ago and the law may have changed since then.

tuxy · 02-07-2019 09:47PM

Section 252 (1) of the Children Act, 2001

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2001/act/24/section/252/enacted/en/html

I'm not sure if that replaced an older law if it didn't then it would have been legal to name children involved in a legal case before 2001.

Aaron Campbell who is a 16 year old who murdered a 6 year old in the UK last year was named but only after the judge made a decision that it was in the publics best interest.
Does anyone know if the judge in a case here in Ireland could make that decision?
It seams like a judge can but only if it's in the best interest of the child so would not apply to this case.

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

Comments