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

iamwhoiam · 15-07-2019 03:10PM

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Where are they in custody now until sentencing?

In Oberstown

Fakediamond · 15-07-2019 03:12PM

The probation reports were done. Can’t be much detail in those, given the short time they had. I wonder why they didn’t ask for more time too?

corpusvile · 15-07-2019 03:19PM

P.Walnuts wrote: »

We yes, I am implying that it is possible for wrongful convictions to occur. I mean that is just fact. I am not implying that it is applicable to this case.

Nobody is saying the system is infallible or that wrongful convictions don't happen & I'm aware you're not applying it here to this case specifically but the logic is still flawed with respect. Usually in wrongful convictions once they become known, there's a clear cut path to see how it occurred. There might be evidence planting, coerced confession, mistreatment, mistaken identity unfair due process etc. Even if someone has their conviction overturned on technicalities, the technicalities themselves are specified. But there's usually a "wtf" style epiphany in such cases, an understanding how the wrongful conviction occurred once the fog clears.

Here there's nothing of that nature. Gardaí did an excellent job even the defence found no flaws. Their trial was certainly fair, no legal errors seem to have happened. Judge seem quite fair in assessing evidence admissibility or lack thereof.

So I can't see them even having grounds for an appeal in this case.

But in general everyone knows wrongful convictions occur but there's no grounds to assume this one is re boy B. Again with respect the argument seems to be that a wrongful conviction could occur because wrongful convictions occur & that's not really how it works.

Vicarious Function · 15-07-2019 03:29PM

If there's going to be any appeal, it may be in connection with length of sentence, but that's jumping the gun a bit at this stage. Just a thought.

forumdedum · 15-07-2019 04:36PM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

Obviously no stone is being left unturned to make sure everything is done right and in order. There was a suggestion some clinicians would be hired from England. Obviously all of this takes time, especially now as we are in the middle of the Summer and many of these experts may not be free to get involved straight away. The testing and interviewing and drawing up relevant reports probably take quite some time too. This was only to be expected.

I like most others hope all is done right.

I recall the Yorkshire Ripper's appeal on grounds of insanity were thrown out at the trial. Against advice of experts I think.

15-07-2019 06:05PM

Suckit wrote: »

It's probably a good thing, but can't be pleasant for Ana's parents waiting.

Not really a good thing. A delay like this is only going to benefit the defendants. Spending 3 extra months basically getting to know the defendants better is not going to incline a Judge to treat them more harshly.

Cryptopagan · 15-07-2019 06:31PM

forumdedum wrote: »

I like most others hope all is done right.

I recall the Yorkshire Ripper's appeal on grounds of insanity were thrown out at the trial. Against advice of experts I think.

How could an appeal be thrown out at the trial? Did he appeal before he was convicted?

forumdedum · 15-07-2019 06:32PM

ChikiChiki wrote: »

From what I hear the opposite. Reports from Osberstown are that they are quite boastful about what they have done and other young offenders are appalled.

Little demons.

Source?

forumdedum · 15-07-2019 06:37PM

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Conversation with a social worker.

Naturally these 2 are seriously flawed in many many ways. If they could do that to that young lady nothing would surprise me.

Eric Cartman · 15-07-2019 06:46PM

Cryptopagan wrote: »

It’s called Oberstown, not Osberstown. And let’s face it, you don’t have any reports from there.

+1. no journo in the country has been able to talk anyone into loosening their lips over how those lads are getting on in there, a poster on here knows nothing either.

P.Walnuts · 15-07-2019 07:38PM

corpusvile wrote: »

Nobody is saying the system is infallible or that wrongful convictions don't happen & I'm aware you're not applying it here to this case specifically but the logic is still flawed with respect. Usually in wrongful convictions once they become known, there's a clear cut path to see how it occurred. There might be evidence planting, coerced confession, mistreatment, mistaken identity unfair due process etc. Even if someone has their conviction overturned on technicalities, the technicalities themselves are specified. But there's usually a "wtf" style epiphany in such cases, an understanding how the wrongful conviction occurred once the fog clears.

Here there's nothing of that nature. Gardaí did an excellent job even the defence found no flaws. Their trial was certainly fair, no legal errors seem to have happened. Judge seem quite fair in assessing evidence admissibility or lack thereof.

So I can't see them even having grounds for an appeal in this case.

But in general everyone knows wrongful convictions occur but there's no grounds to assume this one is re boy B. Again with respect the argument seems to be that a wrongful conviction could occur because wrongful convictions occur & that's not really how it works.

I broadly agree with what you are saying.

My point is that no conviction is infallible, mistakes do happen (no-one , including myself know every exact detail of the case).

Let's say for instance Boy A volunteers that Boy B did not know of his intention to kill? It's unlikely but would immediately cast doubt on Boy B's murder conviction.

Again i'm not saying Boy B is not guilty, I just found the sentiments of the particular post I initially responded to a little troubling

Vicarious Function · 15-07-2019 08:31PM

P.Walnuts wrote: »

I broadly agree with what you are saying.

My point is that no conviction is infallible, mistakes do happen (no-one , including myself know every exact detail of the case).

Let's say for instance Boy A volunteers that Boy B did not know of his intention to kill? It's unlikely but would immediately cast doubt on Boy B's murder conviction.

Again i'm not saying Boy B is not guilty, I just found the sentiments of the particular post I initially responded to a little troubling

Before and during the trial was when Boy A had every opportunity to say such a thing, but he chose to remain silent.

P.Walnuts · 15-07-2019 10:01PM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

Before and during the trial was when Boy A had every opportunity to say such a thing, but he chose to remain silent.

He sure did.

Sometimes people don't confess/tell the truth for years after conviction

In my post I said it's very unlikely, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility

Vlthap · 15-07-2019 10:06PM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

If there's going to be any appeal, it may be in connection with length of sentence, but that's jumping the gun a bit at this stage. Just a thought.

Has either boy's legal team indicated they were appealing the conviction. I was half expecting Boy B's legal team to do this.

tuxy · 15-07-2019 10:14PM

Vlthap wrote: »

Has either boy's legal team indicated they were appealing the conviction. I was half expecting Boy B's legal team to do this.

Why did you think that?
They can't just appeal because they don't like the outcome. They would have to find fault with the way the trial was conducted.

Limpy · 15-07-2019 10:22PM

Was it the case boy A didn't deny having sex with Ana?, he said no comment. As it was the prosecutions case to prove he sexually assaulted her?

The reason I ask is because he surely told his parents and defence he had consensual sex with her. The evidence proves he did. How does his parents stand over that. If they know he had sex then they surely know he did the rest of brutal crimes.

They shouted at the jury after the verdict knowing what these monsters did. Shame on them.

tuxy · 15-07-2019 10:24PM

Limpy wrote: »

They shouted at the jury after the verdict knowing what these monsters did. Shame on them.

No one shouted at the Jury, what are you talking about?

Vlthap · 15-07-2019 10:25PM

tuxy wrote: »

Why did you think that?
They can't just appeal because they don't like the outcome. They would have to find fault with the way the trial was conducted.

I'm not familiar at all with the legal system but it seems to be the thing to do in most murder trials as soon as a guilty verdict is made. With the way the media was emphasising that the evidence against Boy B was circumstantial and gleaned from things he did/didn't say or changed his statement about in the interviews, I thought they would lodge an appeal as soon as they could.

So if they were to appeal they'd have to have a fairly compelling reason to do so?

Vlthap · 15-07-2019 10:28PM

Limpy wrote: »

Was it the case boy A didn't deny having sex with Ana?, he said no comment. As it was the prosecutions case to prove he sexually assaulted her?

The reason I ask is because he surely told his parents and defence he had consensual sex with her. The evidence proves he did. How does his parents stand over that. If they know he had sex then they surely know he did the rest of brutal crimes.

They shouted at the jury after the verdict knowing what these monsters did. Shame on them.

tuxy wrote: »

No one shouted at the Jury, what are you talking about?

I heard that too but I heard it was Boy B's father who was being loud and obnoxious, calling names as the Jury left the Courtroom and also at Gardaí. I'll see if I can find where I read it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/bunch-of-scumbags-father-of-boy-b-loudly-condemns-verdict-1.3929674

spurious · 15-07-2019 10:30PM

Vlthap wrote: »

I heard that too but I heard it was Boy B's father who shouted at the Jury and at Gardaí. I'll see if I can find where I read it.

I read it was at the Gardai, not the jury.

Vlthap · 15-07-2019 10:33PM

spurious wrote: »

I read it was at the Gardai, not the jury.

That would make sense cos I also read the Judge was no longer in the Courtroom. The Jury would hardly be left behind!!

In saying that though I have no experience of trials or the court system so I don't know!

Limpy · 15-07-2019 10:33PM

tuxy wrote: »

No one shouted at the Jury, what are you talking about?

Well if the jury were present when the judgment was read then they would of been on the receiving end of the rants, as well as the gardai and judge.

gozunda · 15-07-2019 10:59PM

Vlthap wrote: »

That would make sense cos I also read the Judge was no longer in the Courtroom. The Jury would hardly be left behind!!

In saying that though I have no experience of trials or the court system so I don't know!

The first outburst happened when the judge was thanking jury members for their jury service. The father then left the court after security said 'he's too high" - the father of boy B then re-entered the court and continued his rant - at this stage the judge had left.

From the reports his language was insulting, quite colourful and appeared to be directed at the investigative gardai present.

I would love to be a fly on the wall at the Interviews the judge called for prior to sentancing, with this man ...

n97 mini · 15-07-2019 11:39PM

splinter65 wrote: »

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If you were correct, A's parents would not be included in the process. So you are wrong.

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.

Bull crap. From the outset the judge separated the wheat from the chaff. Boy B's evidence could not be used against Boy A. Therefore Boy B's father's reaction to the verdict counted for nothing.

The judge is trying to be as fair as possible, nothing more, nothing less. I commend him for leaving no stone unturned.

Suckit · 16-07-2019 01:10AM

I'm only really curious as to boy A.
If he had spoken, he may have also caught himself up in lies. It is also possible he was still in shock (and maybe is still shaken) by what he did. I hope he is.
It wouldn't excuse a thing he did. But if it was/is the case, he may show some signs of regret at a later date, or hopefully some signs of remorse.
He may have found the actual act of murder a lot more traumatising than he thought he would.

I also wonder how heavily monitored their internet activity is in Oberstown. Are they reading this thread?
Does anyone know how strict it is?

tuxy · 16-07-2019 01:31AM

Suckit wrote: »

I also wonder how heavily monitored their internet activity is in Oberstown. Are they reading this thread?
Does anyone know how strict it is?

Internet access?
It's not an open prison, there aren't people constantly smuggling in mobile phones and drugs!

Suckit · 16-07-2019 01:56AM

tuxy wrote: »

Internet access?
It's not an open prison, there aren't people constantly smuggling in mobile phones and drugs!

They have internet access, it is limited, but I'm sure I read something about circumstances allowing more internet access to them in more recent times (it may have been up for review).

I was just wondering how limited it currently is.

McCrack · 16-07-2019 12:50PM

Very limited and limited for educational purposes

Gadgetman496 · 16-07-2019 06:52PM

Slightly off topic but worrying all the same

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0716/1063373-attack-child/

Vicarious Function · 16-07-2019 08:34PM

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

Slightly off topic but worrying all the same

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0716/1063373-attack-child/

I'm also wondering if this has arisen as a result of details of Ana's attack being broadcast. The eldest child, a boy, is ten years old. Old enough to influence two other younger boys to attack a young girl, 5 and a half, in an abandoned shed. Lucky for her that she managed to escape and good on her parents that they reported it to the Police.

Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were just ten, when they murdered James Bolger.

Back on track, Thompson and Venables received one to one tutoring while in detention.

Am just wondering how Boys A and B will occupy their time during the Summer Hols (apart from psychological testing) and will they have one to one tutoring during Sept and October while they await their sentencing on Oct. 29. All at tax-payers' expense, of course!

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

Comments