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

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....!

It was a decision by the judge after the trial. During it they were known as Child A and Child B

After they were convicted the judge said "I did this because the public interest overrode the interest of the defendants. There was a need for an informed public debate on crimes committed by young children."

Many have criticised his decision and it's not typically done in the UK these days either.

Both Venables and Thompson later got 5-figure payouts from the European Court of Human Rights after determining that they didn't get a fair trial and because there was a push to increase their sentence

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

None of this is true. If it were then no adult murderer would ever be named as it might effect the families. It’s clear that the law is to protect the child not the family.

^^ This. At the end of the trial I was somewhat ambiguous about the issue of the guilty parties being named in the interest of the public good at some future point.

Havng read the evidence and testimony I admit that my ideas on this issue has changed somewhat. Not only because the nature of the crime but the refusal of the the guilty parties to admit to their parts in the murder.

The unrepentant savagery of the attack and killing and the apparent use of excessive and brutal force (what is referred to as over-kill ) marks these individuals as cruel and sadistic murderers. The fact that both are so young makes this in some ways an even more depraved and remarkable crime

Whilst both are in prison or detention - I see no practical reason that their names be released, however once either boy qualifies for release of any kind - then the greater good should dictate that in the interests of public safety that these two boys names should be made public. And of that I am in no doubt

I accept that the parents may face opprobrium when and if this happens - but that will be no more than any other murderers family does in similar circumstances tbh.

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Graham Dwyer , Mark Hennesy , Joe O Reilly , are all brutal killers and I dont recall their families ever having any issues or problems from vigilanties .

In those cases there was overwhelming sympathy for their families, probably because they were grown adults. No one could try to blame their parents for mistakes they made while bringing them up

In this case people ARE trying to blame the parents, saying they are equally culpable.

abff wrote: »

Not really comparable. When children do terrible things, people often assume that it was at least partly due to bad parenting. Whether this is true or not (and it probably is in some, but not all, cases), the fact that some people may jump to this conclusion puts their family at risk of reprisals.

Of course, in this case, it seems highly unlikely that there are too many people living locally (or who had a child in the school that Ana attended) who don't know the identity of the two boys.

Is this proven to be be the case ? Has it happened in other cases ? Have there been attacks on families of child killers .I am not disputing it , I am just wondering .

Is there enough evidence out there to give the general public the belief that the prison system rehabilitates the criminal ie ‘deprivation of liberty and couciling and therapy are sufficient..? Based on the rates of Re-offending that get reported the general consensus would be that it doesn’t.

The closest example we have to this case would be the Jamie Bulger one. Here one of the boys seems to have been ‘cured’ by his detention and ‘treatment’ and this surprisingly was the boy that was deemed to be the leader and cruelest of the two. The other guy venables has twice breached the terms of his realese and spent two additional periods in jail for possession of vile images.....he would be the equivalent of ‘animal B’ in this case.

The likehood is that in 12/15 years time this two inhuman animals will be assessed by the parole board and associated experts and deemed suitable for release and given new identities etc......probably accompanied by strict conditions that if breached will result in them being back in prison immediately.

Omackeral wrote: »

I think 1 in 3 re-offends. I work within the Prison Service and it's like a revolving door. You see the same faces in and out all the time. It's a habitual thing. They're not required to rehabilitate. The ones that do take up courses like Alternative To Violence are doing it off their own bat mostly. A lot of the time, they're only doing them to get the certificates, not because it'll fix them. A vast swathe of offenders are in there walking around exercise yards doing nothing but talking to other inmates about jobs and scams they've pulled. Ironically, they network with them and probably hook up together to do more crimes when they're out, essentially broadening their criminal horizons and coming out worse.



Not a shot at you but the poor child's names was James. His family never called him 'Jamie'. His mother Denise has said many times over the years how hurt she was that the media selected this name for him, a name he was never known by. He deserves to be known by the name his family gave him.

Similar to ‘maddie’ being used by the media for Madelyn McCann.....?

Road-Hog wrote: »

Similar to ‘maddie’ being used by the media for Madelyn McCann.....?

Madeleine Mc Cann was her name . Apparently her parents never used Maddie .

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Madeleine Mc Cann was her name . Apparently her parents never used Maddie .

Oops. I see I spelt her name incorrectly

gozunda wrote: »

^^ This. At the end of the trial I was somewhat ambiguous about the issue of the guilty parties being named in the interest of the public good at some future point.

Havng read the evidence and testimony I admit that my ideas on this issue has changed somewhat. Not only because the nature of the crime but the refusal of the the guilty parties to admit to their parts in the murder.

The unrepentant savagery of the attack and killing and the apparent use of excessive and brutal force (what is referred to as over-kill ) marks these individuals as cruel and sadistic murderers. The fact that both are so young makes this in some ways an even more depraved and remarkable crime

Whilst both are in prison or detention - I see no practical reason that their names be released, however once either boy qualifies for release of any kind - then the greater good should dictate that in the interests of public safety that these two boys names should be made public. And of that I am in no doubt

I accept that the parents may face opprobrium when and if this happens - but that will be no more than any other murderers family does in similar circumstances tbh.

And in one sense the cunning of it, to lead an naive girl through the fields I presume so they would not be recognized to a nearby village to put the focus of investigations on that village. The barbarity of the act is something I cant get my head around for two 13 to do. The beat Anna to a pulp for their own gratification, one obv a violent sexual deviant and the other a voyeuristic smart-ass sadist. I just cant see how rehabilitation comes into the equation. I'm sure there was extended planning went into it prior. And the degree of denial for me indicates the level they will go to deny the wrong doing. From what I see of it Boy A, he thinks he has a right to attack to sexually abuse as of right. Yet these are on 13 has me wondering to their criminal abilities when wised-up to better avoiding detection. Anyone who did these deeds are totally warped. As for Boy B he did his best to demean & make little of a kid he led to her death. He had not one scintilla of empathy or compassion. All both of these did during the trial was show their fear for the unknown they brought themselves into.

mrjoneill wrote: »

Don't know what the fuss was & still is about.

At the time the trial was still ongoing against the two boys. It could have had all sorts of effects on the case.
At that stage there was no proof as such, that was when she was being lured to her death.