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

Hannibal_Smith · 13-07-2019 07:37PM

And back on the roundabout we go.

avalidusername · 13-07-2019 09:28PM

Regarding the judge looking for clinician interviews with the parents, taking into account Boy B's fathers outburst in court, I'm of the opinion that the judge could have taken that into account and is looking for professional advice as to whether the actions of the boys could be attributed to nature or nurture.
Is he just an evil little f*cker, or psychologically a good kid who has been brought up terribly.

This would definitely have an impact on sentencing as if he is an inherently evil little f*cker, the book should be thrown at him. If he was believed to be a psychologically sound boy with bad upbringing that has basically twisted him, then there's the possibility that through his teenage years as he matures and is away from his upbringers, he may adjust and be a functional member of society some day. Perhaps the book should be less thrown at him, and just given a fair few slaps of it.

There's reports that in the Bolger case, one of the killers has given out his true identity on 2 occasions and also been jailed 2 times over child porn, still in custody I think. Other lad hasn't come to police or press attention since that I'm aware of, in a job and has a girlfriend, functional member of society despite his despicable past. Maybe there is hope for some people despite their heinous past. Gives hope for humanity if there is.

tuxy · 13-07-2019 09:36PM

avalidusername wrote: »

There's reports that in the Bolger case, one of the killers has given out his true identity on 2 occasions and also been jailed 2 times over child porn, still in custody I think. Other lad hasn't come to police or press attention since that I'm aware of, in a job and has a girlfriend, functional member of society despite his despicable past. Maybe there is hope for some people despite their heinous past. Gives hope for humanity if there is.

The only problem there is it was Venables who people considered less evil and possibly led on by Thompson. Thompson was the one that was considered a born psychopath yet it is Venables that has been in trouble since his release.

avalidusername · 13-07-2019 10:55PM

tuxy wrote: »

The only problem there is it was Venables who people considered less evil and possibly led on by Thompson. Thompson was the one that was considered a born psychopath yet it is Venables that has been in trouble since his release.

Damn...emmm.....
Those are my thoughts, and possibly the judges too!

Kidchameleon · 14-07-2019 06:50AM

splinter65 wrote: »

There’s no doubt in my mind that the outrageous outburst from the father of boy b in part prompted the judge to seek reports on clinical interviews with both sets of parents.

Why would the judge seek a report on A's parents as a result of the actions of B's parent? Do you not see the flaw in your logic there? The judge is highly experienced and has seen similar outbursts many many times before. Court is a very stressful place at the best of times where emotions regularly get the better of people & I think you are reading too much into B's dads outburst (which I am sure he regrets btw).

Look, neither of us are the judge so neither of us know for sure but I am of the opinion that the report would have been ordered either way due to the unusual nature of the situation.

splinter65 · 14-07-2019 07:46AM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why would the judge seek a report on A's parents as a result of the actions of B's parent? Do you not see the flaw in your logic there? The judge is highly experienced and has seen similar outbursts many many times before. Court is a very stressful place at the best of times where emotions regularly get the better of people & I think you are reading too much into B's dads outburst (which I am sure he regrets btw).

Look, neither of us are the judge so neither of us know for sure but I am of the opinion that the report would have been ordered either way due to the unusual nature of the situation.

No, the judge never before presided over the trial of 2 14 year olds found guilty of murder before so he’d never have had the father of one of them shouting abuse at the Gardai while they comforted the family of the victim.
You’re deliberately and pointlessly misinterpreting my point in yet another creepy attempt to defend boy bs father.
Both boys are being sentenced, the parents of both boys are being interviewed.
If you want to open a thread to defend boy bs father then I’ll join you there.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 14-07-2019 08:59AM

avalidusername wrote: »

Perhaps the book should be less thrown at him, and just given a fair few slaps of it.

What the actual fcuk are you on about? He led a child, a classmate, a girl he knew - and still during questioning described her as weird and not someone he’d be seen with - to her death, and a brutal sexual assault and showed no remorse, no guilt, and made no attempt to right any wrong.
A young girl will never experience what it’s like to graduate school, go to college, belong in a group of peers as an equal to them. She will never know first love, a loving relationship, marriage, kids. Anything you would hope and dream for your own child, he took it from her. The girl was clearly extremely troubled from extreme bullying and the last thing she saw before he took her life was the other evil bastard raping her with the mask on.

And you think he should be slapped with the book? He shouldn’t even be allowed look out the window for the rest of his life. No doubt he’ll be out in a few years and no doubt he’ll ruin another families life down the line.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 14-07-2019 09:01AM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why would the judge seek a report on A's parents as a result of the actions of B's parent? Do you not see the flaw in your logic there? The judge is highly experienced and has seen similar outbursts many many times before. Court is a very stressful place at the best of times where emotions regularly get the better of people & I think you are reading too much into B's dads outburst (which I am sure he regrets btw).

Look, neither of us are the judge so neither of us know for sure but I am of the opinion that the report would have been ordered either way due to the unusual nature of the situation.

Maybe because they raised a rapist and a murdering scumbag and quite rightly should be held accountable for how their teens turn out?

corpusvile · 14-07-2019 11:50AM

avalidusername wrote: »

If he was believed to be a psychologically sound boy with bad upbringing that has basically twisted him, then there's the possibility that through his teenage years as he matures and is away from his upbringers, he may adjust and be a functional member of society some day. Perhaps the book should be less thrown at him, and just given a fair few slaps of it.

I would respectfully but strongly disagree with this, but that's what will probably happen anyway knowing this country. But I suspect both have strong psychopathic traits. The majority of psychopaths are actually non violent & when these two are eventually released they might never commit another violent act again. That doesn't mean they're rehabilitated though. I feel the same way about young James Bulger's killers & don't think they should have been released either despite their young ages at the time.

Some offenders forfeit any chance of release imo. The depravity of their crimes makes it too risky to release them. No chance at all should be given. Public safety should come first when it comes to such offenders & in cases like Ana's &James Bulger's we should be ultimately simply relieved they were caught at such an early age, rather than 20 years down the line with possibly more victims in their wake. Once caught such offenders of these specific crimes should never see the light of day again, hardline as that may sound. The risk is simply to great.

Vicarious Function · 14-07-2019 01:44PM

Last night I watched a documentary about the shooting of innocent 11-year old Rhys Jones in Liverpool (Crimes That Shook Britain). The shooter had been 16 years old at the time, but was 18 at the time of the sentencing. He was sentenced to 25 years. Altogether 10 people related to this crime were sentenced to lesser sentences. That included three of their parents, who aided and abetted in covering up and destroying evidence.

At present the shooter is detained in a prison which is nicknamed "Monster Mansion" because of the others who are detained there.

Do we need a "Monster Mansion" in this country to detain our two Monsters?

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/rhys-jones-killer-what-happened-12942018

Updates re the sentences of the Liverpool "Gang"

Kidchameleon · 14-07-2019 08:16PM

Camila Hallowed Apple wrote: »

Maybe because they raised a rapist and a murdering scumbag and quite rightly should be held accountable for how their teens turn out?

Yes thats fine & for the most part I agree with you. My point was that it was not because of B's fathers outburst that they are being assessed.

Kidchameleon · 14-07-2019 08:23PM

splinter65 wrote: »

No, the judge never before presided over the trial of 2 14 year olds found guilty of murder before

Nobody said he did

splinter65 wrote: »

so he’d never have had the father of one of them shouting abuse at the Gardai while they comforted the family of the victim.

I was merely pointing out the flaw in your argument that all of the parents were being assessed as a result of B's fathers outburst, an error you are not succeeding in squirming your way out of...

splinter65 wrote: »

You’re deliberately and pointlessly misinterpreting my point in yet another creepy attempt to defend boy bs father.

Whats wrong with defending an innocent man? And I am not the one who is misrepresenting anybody, that is you...

splinter65 wrote: »

Both boys are being sentenced, the parents of both boys are being interviewed.
If you want to open a thread to defend boy bs father then I’ll join you there.

splinter65 wrote: »

There’s no doubt in my mind that the outrageous outburst from the father of boy b in part prompted the judge to seek reports on clinical interviews with both sets of parents.

Hannibal_Smith · 14-07-2019 08:43PM

Some one posted further up the thread, a report from the Independent which says the Judge ordered Psychiatric Reports on the boys.

The forensic psychologist sought direction and made suggestions on how to prepare the report. It said

Mr Grehan said Prof Kennedy had made a number of suggestions in his letter, including that the boys be assessed by a clinical psychologist with appropriate child and adolescent experience, and that the boys' parents be interviewed.

So it was the professor's suggestion that the boys parents be interviewed.

McCrack · 14-07-2019 08:49PM

Well yes, if professional reports are being prepared for children it would be normal to interview the parents and siblings too

Sawduck · 14-07-2019 08:53PM

Wait are people actually trying to defend you little murders/rapists, seriously come on people we all know these two disgusting rodents deserve the death penalty

Yurt2 · 14-07-2019 08:54PM

Sawduck wrote: »

Wait are people actually trying to defend you little murders/rapists, seriously come on people we all know these two disgusting rodents deserve the death penalty

Strong post. Edgy. 8/10

splinter65 · 14-07-2019 09:26PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Yes thats fine & for the most part I agree with you. My point was that it was not because of B's fathers outburst that they are being assessed.

I think it is, at least partially. You’ve offered no reason as to why you think it’s not.

Suckit · 14-07-2019 09:27PM

I think the psychological profile is more important tomorrow than the sentencing (imo).
If they are reviewed to be 'normal', then the Judge could sentence them to life, but they would still be out in 10 in all likelyhood. Or at least that seems will be the case going by any similar cases.
If they are profiled as being in any way dark or obsessed with torture/rape/murder/violence or anything like that, then I hope it makes it a lot harder for them to get out in the future.
They will be reviewed again in 10 years with that profile hanging over them.

splinter65 · 14-07-2019 09:36PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Nobody said he did

I was merely pointing out the flaw in your argument that all of the parents were being assessed as a result of B's fathers outburst, an error you are not succeeding in squirming your way out of...

Whats wrong with defending an innocent man? And I am not the one who is misrepresenting anybody, that is you...

I’m not squirming. At all. I’m not the one who said Ana’s father was in part to blame for her death as he let her leave the house.
I’m not the one who referred to Ana’s parents as her “mam” and “dad” apparently because she was adopted.
I’m not the one who has page after page dismissed posters disgust at boy bs fathers disgraceful outburst in court and held it up as an example of excellent parenting.
I’m not the one who steadfastly maintains that commenting on the beauty of a child, very traditional and commonplace in this part of the world, is “disturbing”.
That would be you.

Oranage2 · 14-07-2019 09:38PM

Hardly fair to judge Boy B by his father's outburst. The lawyer probably thought he could get off so it was a big shock to the father. Now I agree with the verdict but there's no way to know that Boy B knew Boy A was going to kill her with the evidence given, if he didn't lie so much he'd have most likely been Scot free.

Sawduck · 14-07-2019 09:46PM

Yurt! wrote: »

Strong post. Edgy. 8/10

Thanks and it's all true too

McCrack · 14-07-2019 09:50PM

Oranage2 wrote: »

Hardly fair to judge Boy B by his father's outburst. The lawyer probably thought he could get off so it was a big shock to the father. Now I agree with the verdict but there's no way to know that Boy B knew Boy A was going to kill her with the evidence given, if he didn't lie so much he'd have most likely been Scot free.

Where does one begin with posts like this..

8-10 · 14-07-2019 09:59PM

McCrack wrote: »

Where does one begin with posts like this..

That poster's post history is a good place to begin if you're trying to make sense of it

Monumental · 14-07-2019 10:00PM

Oranage2 wrote: »

Hardly fair to judge Boy B by his father's outburst. The lawyer probably thought he could get off so it was a big shock to the father. Now I agree with the verdict but there's no way to know that Boy B knew Boy A was going to kill her with the evidence given, if he didn't lie so much he'd have most likely been Scot free.

This is getting a bit tiresome now ,boy B''s father had enough time to come to terms that his son was involved in Ana's gruesome murder His outburst in court was unacceptable Dont know if boy B knew the final outcome ,but he was there ,saw the horrific murder ,perhaps he was part of it felt no need to let anyone know this poor girl was lying dead in an abondened house ,knowing her parents were lòoking for her He then went home and continued his life as normal Nothing normal about this

tayto lover · 14-07-2019 10:18PM

Oranage2 wrote: »

Hardly fair to judge Boy B by his father's outburst. The lawyer probably thought he could get off so it was a big shock to the father. Now I agree with the verdict but there's no way to know that Boy B knew Boy A was going to kill her with the evidence given, if he didn't lie so much he'd have most likely been Scot free.

The jury believed he was guilty and that’s all that matters.
Most people believe he knew and that he was a conniving little murderer.
Hope they get a big sentence. They deserve it.

tuxy · 14-07-2019 10:30PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Hope they get a big sentence. They deserve it.

Do you think they won't get a life sentence? Or that only one of them will?

Oranage2 · 14-07-2019 10:34PM

I agree and also hope Boy B gets a harsh sentence, but the guilty conviction comes from the fact that he supplied the tape and his body language and intonation of his voice during the interview which the majority of us haven't seen. Based on the the knowledge I have of the case I thought his verdict could go either way.

And for the person asking where to start, all I said was he can't judge the parents, we know very little about them, they pleaded not as there's no advantage to plead guilty, and father B shouted in court, also father B didn't care much when the gardai arrived at his door and first asked Boy B questions. These pieces of information aren't enough to say he's a psychopath

tayto lover · 14-07-2019 10:35PM

tuxy wrote: »

Do you think they won't get a life sentence? Or that only one of them will?

They deserve it but I’d say they will get a sentence up to a certain age. Hard to know.

tayto lover · 14-07-2019 10:39PM

Oranage2 wrote: »

I agree and also hope Boy B gets a harsh sentence, but the guilty conviction comes from the fact that he supplied the tape and his body language and intonation of his voice during the interview which the majority of us haven't seen. Based on the the knowledge I have of the case I thought his verdict could go either way.

And for the person asking where to start, all I said was he can't judge the parents, we know very little about them, they pleaded not as there's no advantage to plead guilty, and father B shouted in court, also father B didn't care much when the gardai arrived at his door and first asked Boy B questions.

1. The Garda investigators thought he was guilty and recommended he be charged.
2. The DPP agreed having read the details.
3. The jury agreed he was guilty having listened to the evidence presented.

He’s guilty.

n97 mini · 14-07-2019 10:40PM

splinter65 wrote: »

There’s no doubt in my mind that the outrageous outburst from the father of boy b in part prompted the judge to seek reports on clinical interviews with both sets of parents.
The nature of the outburst was very telling, first of all the loud denial of what was obvious to anyone who could see and hear (“an innocent boy”), the attack on the Gardai the prosecution team and the jury, (“you bunch of scumbags”) all of whom had done an impeccable and faultless job ( as agreed by the defense team who had no complaints to make) and gave an insight to all but yourself about the nature of the man. The total contempt in that moment for the family of the child his son murdered.
It was a clear as a bell then that clinically anslysed interviews with both sets of parents would go along way to informing the judge as to appropriate sentencing.

Nobody's parents were on trial, so what they did or didn't do is of no consequence. The judge wants to build up a profile of both boys, by looking at all available information, before sentencing. This includes school reports. Like the parents, the school isn't on trial either.

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

Comments