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

Fakediamond · 16-07-2019 10:52PM

tuxy wrote: »

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

I dunno, I am aware that there’s huge pressure on kids on day/weekend passes to bring drugs in on their return, and they do.

tuxy · 16-07-2019 11:13PM

Fakediamond wrote: »

I dunno, I am aware that there’s huge pressure on kids on day/weekend passes to bring drugs in on their return, and they do.

Actually good point, I guess those on good behaviour get to spend some time with their family. I can't see much money to be made like in regular prisons but maybe the pressure you talk about is enough.

mrjoneill · 17-07-2019 12:45AM

Suckit wrote: »

I think Oranage2 meant (and said) that there was no evidence to prove anything on Boy B. The first sentence was a separate point.
I agree with that (there was no physical evidence).

It's also hard to know where to start explaining any belief of what happened, as that's all it is. Guessing.
But going by the evidence we are privy to (in a nutshell so missing a bit).
Boy B was only caught (imo) because he was brought in to make a statement before he believed he was a suspect. At the time he still believed he was only 'helping' the Gardaí locate her.
Facts:
- by filling them with lies.
When Ana was found, Boy B's statement was reviewed along with cctv footage, and he had to lie again to explain why the cctv and his statement didn't match up. And then the lies continued (for over 16 hours of statements).

After many different statements (some of which have been published), One is of Boy B admitting that he was in the house and watched Boy A attack her.
His (I think) final statement says he ran away after watching Boy A flip her over and take off her top, because he was afraid.

Boy B walked home and stopped off at the park rangers hut to get a drink of water. (according to himself, witnesses and cctv) .
Once home he finished his homework and went upstairs to watch Anime on his TV in his bedroom.
The Gardaí called to his house that night (looking for Ana) and he was surprised to see them, but still calm. And never mentioned Boy A, the house or anything that he had seen.

A year later - and even though a lot of what he said did not match up, the father knew at the very least, his son had called into Ana's house, convinced her to come out, thought she was a weirdo and not somebody he liked, walked with her for 3km to bring her to an abandoned house and watched his friend whom he brought her to meet, beat her and strip her to her underwear.

Boy B then says he ran away 'sprinting'.
He cannot account for 35 minutes from when he ran away to when turns up again on cctv walking.

I am not blaming the parents, nor have I, for this heinous crime, but I do believe that Boy B's father is either not the brightest individual and that is why he erupted in court.
Or
He is just (putting it mildly) an inconsiderate ****ing idiot that is aware of everything that has happened and what Ana's parents have been through for a year (and will continue to go through for the rest of their lives), but still thought that was the best time to shout out - Because lets be honest, if he isn't stupid, he must have been able to see that his son had a hand in her death.
Albeit without any physical proof that he physically had a hand.
The father chose to believe everything his son said, and I can't blame him for that, but do think that there is a point when you have to stop believing, and murder would definitely be after that point.

Boy B claims to have watched Boy A strip her by pulling her top off over her head, but it was ripped off her.

Impossible to put bullet points in a nutshell, as I found out when I tried. There are tons of articles and each one gives a little bit of evidence/statements that were seen and heard in court that aren't in other publications.

Boy B's synopsis
https://www.thejournal.ie/who-is-boy-b-ana-kriegel-murder-trial-4657833-Jun2019/

You left out most importantly Boy B was able to mark on a sketch where Ana's body was found. Incidentally Ana's body only clothing when found was "wearing socks". Where Ana's body was found was not where she was brutally beaten to death. Boy B did not state Ana was beaten with a weapon which she clearly was when standing as indicated by the blood spatter. This seems to be close to the room door, Boy B does not state Ana was beaten with a weapon when she was on the ground. And finally Ana was dragged by the ligature around her neck provided by Boy B to the place where she was found, the back of the room. Only thing one can deduce is Boy B was present for the vicious assault till the very end. Boy B also stated that he became aware of Boy A had the crotch of his pants open when he stood-up, Obv this is to do with the sex assault aspect but Boy B does not inform exactly what was the sex-assault. And confusing what I understand from CCTV & clothes washed by his mother, this was a tracksuit-bottoms.
Its my belief to the reason Boy B lied so much & did not provide an accurate description of what took place is because it would highlight the degree of his own involvement. I do believe Boy B led Ana into the dark room where she was found and upon entering this room was an immediate viciously assaulted by Boy A to the degree she had a broken eye socket and deep scalp wounds. The nature of the assault was sheer savagery yet he had no problems over it.

mrjoneill · 17-07-2019 12:58AM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

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!

I would not think its absolutely nothing to do with Ana's trial. Long before the internet I do remember isolated cases of children assaulting other children. I remember one case where a child 10 or 12 led a group of younger children to an isolated abandoned house and where he forced the children to sexually assault each other, ordered them to remove their clothing and which I found most offensive rubbed dog excrement into the kids hair. This was a neighboring child well known to the victims. I do recall another case where a teenager with mental health issues approached neighboring kids who knew him and asked them to expose themselves to him, which some did. While these crimes are isolated I do believe they have been always happening.

mrjoneill · 17-07-2019 01:17AM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

I'd say even more so Reality by now is beginning to click in with these two Boys. They're probably realising after their day in court with their Parents today, that their friends from school are now off on the Summer Hols free to run around as they please, enjoying their freedom, which the Boys now don't have.

Yes indeed theses two monsters have a lot of time to reflect on what they did as their peers now have a long hot summer to roam the beautiful park where they lived with the Liffey flowing through it. They have no access to social media and very limited internet, I presume.They are missing the most idealistic period of their lives their mid-teens. I would imagine these are locked up most of the time to stop both meeting and to prevent other "inmates" having a go at them. It would seem at the trial Boy B was wishing it was all a bad nightmare and he could wake up and go home to life prior.
Wonder will the psychiatric/psychological assessment give us any clearer view to what actually took place. Is Boy A going to exercise his right to silence which I believe he will and Boy B going to attempt to fabricate the truth as he has done?

Suckit · 17-07-2019 01:31AM

mrjoneill wrote: »

You left out.....

I left out loads. I was trying to point out some points without going into every detail.

I found that a lot harder than I thought.

Vicarious Function · 17-07-2019 08:12AM

mrjoneill wrote: »

Yes indeed theses two monsters have a lot of time to reflect on what they did as their peers now have a long hot summer to roam the beautiful park where they lived with the Liffey flowing through it. They have no access to social media and very limited internet, I presume.They are missing the most idealistic period of their lives their mid-teens. I would imagine these are locked up most of the time to stop both meeting and to prevent other "inmates" having a go at them. It would seem at the trial Boy B was wishing it was all a bad nightmare and he could wake up and go home to life prior.
Wonder will the psychiatric/psychological assessment give us any clearer view to what actually took place. Is Boy A going to exercise his right to silence which I believe he will and Boy B going to attempt to fabricate the truth as he has done?

All of that, but most importantly they will miss developing relationships with girls. Prior to what they've done they might have had some chance of developing this in a normal way. They've now forfeited this forever, it seems. As always seems to happen with "monsters" such as these, there will be a girl (girls) who will write to them, thinking they are in love or can reform them. I imagine all of these boys' mail will be monitored by staff, as it comes in.

LollipopJimmy · 17-07-2019 10:21AM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

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!

What is the alternative to the emboldened? At some point, no matter what the sentence these two boys will reenter society, I would rather they were educated and an attempt at rehabilitation before this happens

A2LUE42 · 17-07-2019 10:28AM

Just saw a story in todays Independent about an incident two weeks ago in the north east of the country where 'A five-year-old girl was “lured” to a derelict house and beaten by three young boys who allegedly attempted to sexually assault her in a shed before the child escaped and raised the alarm.'

Was this some sort of copy cat or what is going on that is giving really young children the idea to do this?

Vicarious Function · 17-07-2019 11:37AM

A2LUE42 wrote: »

Just saw a story in todays Independent about an incident two weeks ago in the north east of the country where 'A five-year-old girl was “lured” to a derelict house and beaten by three young boys who allegedly attempted to sexually assault her in a shed before the child escaped and raised the alarm.'

Was this some sort of copy cat or what is going on that is giving really young children the idea to do this?

We've been discussing this going back a few posts. Have you not read them?

Vicarious Function · 17-07-2019 11:42AM

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

What is the alternative to the emboldened? At some point, no matter what the sentence these two boys will reenter society, I would rather they were educated and an attempt at rehabilitation before this happens

Of course! Rehabilitation has to be in the picture. Just saying this does not come cheap! And the Taxpayer carries the can.

ohnonotgmail · 17-07-2019 11:49AM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

Of course! Rehabilitation has to be in the picture. Just saying this does not come cheap! And the Taxpayer carries the can.

It comes a lot cheaper than not doing it.

Vicarious Function · 17-07-2019 11:54AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

It comes a lot cheaper than not doing it.

Probably right there, ohnonotgmail! :P

Also from what I've read re the James Bolger murderers, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, providing a new identity does not come cheap either. Apparently it's very expensive.

PS I don't know why "Venables" has appeared as the title of this post. Can't remove it.

LollipopJimmy · 17-07-2019 03:12PM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

Of course! Rehabilitation has to be in the picture. Just saying this does not come cheap! And the Taxpayer carries the can.

Rehabilitating a couple of murderers is a worthwhile expense.

iamwhoiam · 17-07-2019 03:17PM

Well I hope the parents have to pay for school books and school equipment for them . And use the children’s allowance for their extras in there . Then they are still responsible for them

ohnonotgmail · 17-07-2019 03:20PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Well I hope the parents have to pay for school books and school equipment for them . And use the children’s allowance for their extras in there . Then they are still responsible for them

the parents will not be paid childrens allowance while their children are in oberstown.

iamwhoiam · 17-07-2019 03:22PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the parents will not be paid childrens allowance while their children are in oberstown.

Thanks I wasn’t sure about that

Kidchameleon · 17-07-2019 04:31PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Well I hope the parents have to pay for school books and school equipment for them . And use the children’s allowance for their extras in there

Yeah thatll teach em

17-07-2019 04:42PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Yeah thatll teach em

Yes. Quite literally. That's the point.

iamwhoiam · 17-07-2019 04:59PM

Omackeral wrote: »

Yes. Quite literally. That's the point.

I would genuinely be interested what the parents would be expected to contribute towards the boys keep . Then responsibility doesn’t stop I hope . But I am guessing my taxes pay most of it

tuxy · 17-07-2019 05:09PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I would genuinely be interested what the parents would be expected to contribute towards the boys keep . Then responsibility doesn’t stop I hope . But I am guessing my taxes pay most of it

When children are taken from their parents and into the care of the state. Who normally pays in that situation?

iamwhoiam · 17-07-2019 05:27PM

tuxy wrote: »

When children are taken from their parents and into the care of the state. Who normally pays in that situation?

I am guessing our taxes

Vicarious Function · 17-07-2019 06:44PM

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

Rehabilitating a couple of murderers is a worthwhile expense.

Assuming that it's possible to rehabilitate them!

splinter65 · 17-07-2019 06:50PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Yeah thatll teach em

The parents won’t need Child Benefit again in respect of a child for whom they don’t incur any more expenses, hopefully they won’t be living at home as children any more.
It’s not a punishment on the parents it’s just common sense.
The taxpayer foots the bill from here out for the entire maintenance of your child. You can’t expect to get €145 per month as well.
Your sense of injustice on behalf of these parents knows no bounds.
Ana’s parents are down one child benefit too.
For much different reasons.
But your not too concerned about them.

Vicarious Function · 17-07-2019 07:01PM

splinter65 wrote: »

The parents won’t need Child Benefit again in respect of a child for whom they don’t incur any more expenses, hopefully they won’t be living at home as children any more.
It’s not a punishment on the parents it’s just common sense.
The taxpayer foots the bill from here out for the entire maintenance of your child. You can’t expect to get €145 per month as well.
Your sense of injustice on behalf of these parents knows no bounds.
Ana’s parents are down one child benefit too.
For much different reasons.
But your not too concerned about them.

I think you are putting a wrong interpretation on this, splinter65. People are just mulling over in their minds as to how the arrangements might work. Just discussing! Simple as!

Road-Hog · 17-07-2019 09:30PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I would genuinely be interested what the parents would be expected to contribute towards the boys keep . Then responsibility doesn’t stop I hope . But I am guessing my taxes pay most of it

Not sure what the prison service’s budget is but I would imagine that keeping animal A and animal B in detention/jail and ‘reforming’ them giving them new identities etc (despite how worthless/futile it seems) would be a very small percentage of the overall annual budget

Vicarious Function · 17-07-2019 10:05PM

Jon Venables, killer of James Bulger, was given a new identity. When he was released from prison, and had a few drinks in his local pub, he would divulge his real name to all who would listen. So much for being given new identities with all that that costs the Taxpayer!

Source: Crimes That Shook Britain C&I Channel Documentary.

forumdedum · 17-07-2019 10:11PM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

Jon Venables, killer of James Bulger, was given a new identity. When he was released from prison, and had a few drinks in his local pub, he would divulge his real name to all who would listen. So much for being given new identities with all that that costs the Taxpayer!

Source: Crimes That Shook Britain C&I Channel Documentary.

They were warned. 1 slip up and back to jail. That never happened. Why wouldn't he reveal his identity over and over knowing there was no consequence.

Absolute joke. And then the UK were trying to ship them abroad. What? to murder someone in another country. What a very odd world we live in.

tuxy · 17-07-2019 10:27PM

forumdedum wrote: »

They were warned. 1 slip up and back to jail. That never happened. Why wouldn't he reveal his identity over and over knowing there was no consequence.

Robert Thompson was the one the police considered the ring leader in that murder. What's your opinion of him since he left prison?

Vicarious Function · 17-07-2019 10:33PM

tuxy wrote: »

Robert Thompson was the one the police considered the ring leader in that murder. What's your opinion of him since he left prison?

According to the documentary on C&I Channel, Robert Thompson was regarded as being the more intelligent of the two. Apparently he has steered clear of the law and has not been back to prison, as Venables has. The comment that was made was that maybe Thompson possibly was smart enough to be able to evade being caught out in anything by Police.

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

Comments