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

Kidchameleon · 07-09-2019 4:42pm

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

He did nothing to blame himself for.

Other than the outburst in the courtroom, do you think the parents of A and B did anything they should be blaming themselves for?

Suckit · 07-09-2019 4:49pm

Allowing their children to plead not guilty and dragging Ana's parents through courts would be something they should be looking at.
No matter how much they wanted to believe their children were innocent, it was obvious that neither were from very early on.

Hannibal_Smith · 07-09-2019 4:50pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

He did nothing to blame himself for.

Other than the outburst in the courtroom, do you think the parents of A and B did anything they should be blaming themselves for?

Patric Kreigel did NOTHING to blame himself for in relation to his daughter's murder. Without qualification or what ifs.

If I was the parent of a scumbag murderer I would ask myself a few questions alright. I certainly wouldnt act the way that Father did and show my total lack of class and composure like he did.

Kidchameleon · 07-09-2019 4:58pm

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

If I was the parent of a scumbag murderer I would ask myself a few questions alright..

Do you think Patric ever regretted letting Ana go with that boy? Geraldine knew immediately that Ana was in trouble when she found out she went off with the boy, why didnt Patrick know Ana was in danger? Geraldine stated that she would not have let Ana go off with him yet Patric had no problem with it.

If someone tells me that the parents of A and B "should have known" what they were up to then I think it is fair to say that Patric should have been aware also.

Suckit · 07-09-2019 5:03pm

Why would anyone ever suspect that letting their daughter go out for a few minutes with a boy of the same age, think it would lead to that?
You are patheticly spinning the same line to get a reaction for almost 5 months now. Not sure why anyone (including myself) responds to these posts that are obviously written to provoke.

Kidchameleon · 07-09-2019 5:08pm

Suckit wrote: »

Why would anyone ever suspect that letting their daughter go out for a few minutes with a boy of the same age, think it would lead to that?
You are patheticly spinning the same line to get a reaction for almost 5 months now. Not sure why anyone (including myself) responds to these posts that are obviously written to provoke.

Why dont you ask Geraldine Kriegel...

"Geraldine Kriegel tells court she was 'immediately concerned' when Ana left home with one of accused"

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/geraldine-kriegel-tells-court-immediately-14981649

Suckit · 07-09-2019 5:11pm

You have no idea why Geraldine Kriegel was concerned, there could have been a thousand reasons. I doubt she ever thought that murder was going to be one of them. I'm also fairly certain that she or anyone in a similar position wouldn't want you, me or anyone posting on her behalf to make some nonsense point.

Hannibal_Smith · 07-09-2019 5:11pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

If I was the parent of a scumbag murderer I would ask myself a few questions alright..

Do you think Patric ever regretted letting Ana go with that boy? Geraldine knew immediately that Ana was in trouble when she found out she went off with the boy, why didnt Patrick know Ana was in danger? Geraldine stated that she would not have let Ana go off with him yet Patric had no problem with it.

If someone tells me that the parents of A and B "should have known" what they were up to then I think it is fair to say that Patric should have been aware also.

Patric did nothing wrong. He is in no way to blame what happened to his daughter.

You're shooting yourself in the foot there. If The boys' parents couldn't have known that their sons were murderers, then how the hell could Patric have known.

It is the lowest form of reason to think that any finger should be pointed at the father of a girl who was murdered. Its just a ridiculous attempt to deflect attention from the murderers and the atrocious way that father acted in court. They are the only ones to blame for what they did.

Kidchameleon · 07-09-2019 5:28pm

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

They are the only ones to blame for what they did.

THAT IS MY FREAKING POINT

Kidchameleon · 07-09-2019 5:38pm

Suckit wrote: »

You have no idea why Geraldine Kriegel was concerned, there could have been a thousand reasons. I doubt she ever thought that murder was going to be one of them. I'm also fairly certain that she or anyone in a similar position wouldn't want you, me or anyone posting on her behalf to make some nonsense point.

And yet there are posters in here who think the parents of A and B should have known that they were murderers.

McCrack · 07-09-2019 5:43pm

The parents of these murderers do need to take a long look at themselves particularly with the overwhelming forensic evidence which would have been disclosed in the Book of Evidence prior to the trial and allowed their disgusting teenage killers to plead not guilty

Suckit · 07-09-2019 5:44pm

He has been saying the same line, with the same rhetoric since he started posting. Mainly so he can try and corner other posters and reply with the same line he's been replying with.

Not worth reading or replying to, to be honest.

tuxy · 07-09-2019 5:47pm

McCrack wrote: »

The parents of these murderers do need to take a long look at themselves particularly with the overwhelming forensic evidence which would have been disclosed in the Book of Evidence prior to the trial and allowed their disgusting teenage killers to plead not guilty

There was no forensic evidence against Boy B, the main evidence was his interviews in the Garda station.

McCrack · 07-09-2019 5:53pm

tuxy wrote: »

There was no forensic evidence against Boy B, the main evidence was his interviews in the Garda station.

Yes and all contained in the Book of Evidence

Presumably one of his parents sat in on the interviews too

Kidchameleon · 07-09-2019 5:53pm

McCrack wrote: »

The parents of these murderers do need to take a long look at themselves particularly with the overwhelming forensic evidence which would have been disclosed in the Book of Evidence prior to the trial and allowed their disgusting teenage killers to plead not guilty

OH FFS, we have been over this, in Ireland there is no advantage to pleading guilty. Its the law, I don't like it but that's the way it is.

McCrack · 07-09-2019 6:00pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

OH FFS, we have been over this, in Ireland there is no advantage to pleading guilty. Its the law, I don't like it but that's the way it is.

No

In cases of adults yes because mandatory life applies regardless of plea

However involving children (under 18) being sentenced for murder the court has discretion and one consideration the court will give is whether the children pleaded guilty or not

In this case the murderers did not plead guilty so they will rightly not be entitled to credit by way of mitigation

Allinall · 07-09-2019 6:05pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

OH FFS, we have been over this, in Ireland there is no advantage to pleading guilty. Its the law, I don't like it but that's the way it is.

Wrong.

splinter65 · 07-09-2019 6:06pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

OH FFS, we have been over this, in Ireland there is no advantage to pleading guilty. Its the law, I don't like it but that's the way it is.

There is a very clear advantage to a murderer pleading guilty.
The advantage is to the family of the victim.
If you plead guilty then you won’t have put the family of the victim through even more agony and misery then you have already caused them, by forcing them to sit through week after week of evidence of how you brutally murdered their child, and tried to get away with it.
But the only victims you see here kidchameleon are the family of murderer b.
So that’s not clear to you.
It’s clear to any decent person with a moral compass. Just not you.

Hannibal_Smith · 07-09-2019 6:06pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

They are the only ones to blame for what they did.

THAT IS MY FREAKING POINT

I am including the father in that.

And no, that's not your point. Your sick point is that Patric should feel some sort of blame for his daughter being killed.

Don't forget, the boys haven't even told what happened. Nice parenting there

pinkyeye · 07-09-2019 8:05pm

I don't agree with everything Kidchameleon is saying but I do think that it's a bit hypocritical to blame one set of parents and not another.

It's no-ones fault except the two boys that carried out these murders. Full stop.

Spanish Eyes · 07-09-2019 8:22pm

The alleged murderers were THIRTEEN years of age.

Just file that away for future reference.

I just hope they get a sentence that allows their identities to be revealed once they are over 18.

splinter65 · 07-09-2019 8:24pm

pinkyeye wrote: »

I don't agree with everything Kidchameleon is saying but I do think that it's a bit hypocritical to blame one set of parents and not another.

It's no-ones fault except the two boys that carried out these murders. Full stop.

Murderer bs father made a diabolical scene in court when his son was found guilty. He shouted dogs abuse at the Gardai and the jurors who had worked so hard and done such a professional job. It was outrageous and must have been very alarming for the Kriegel family.
That’s why he’s getting singled out.
Murderer a family at least maintained a respectful silence.

splinter65 · 07-09-2019 8:25pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The alleged murderers were THIRTEEN years of age.

Just file that away for future reference.

I just hope they get a sentence that allows their identities to be revealed once they are over 18.

They’re not alleged. They’re proven murderers.

Road-Hog · 07-09-2019 8:31pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The alleged murderers were THIRTEEN years of age.

Just file that away for future reference.

I just hope they get a sentence that allows their identities to be revealed once they are over 18.

What do you mean by ‘allegded’...they have subsequently being found guilty so alleged can be dropped and something like ‘sadistic sexual deviant abominations of murderes’ might be a better way of referring to them......still don’t see much point in all this Phsyco-analysis of them......can the judge not just play it safe and to keep society safe and keep these ‘excuses of humans’ detained for as long as is legally possible.......can there really be a way of ‘reforming ‘ such deviants....? Why should society have to take the risk of what these two could end up doing When released in the future.....?

Spanish Eyes · 07-09-2019 8:40pm

OK, OK! Convicted Murderers so.

My point still stands. They were Thirteen years old. Honest to God what the actual F.

iamwhoiam · 07-09-2019 8:41pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The alleged murderers were THIRTEEN years of age.

Just file that away for future reference.

I just hope they get a sentence that allows their identities to be revealed once they are over 18.

Tried , convicted and found guilty by a jury . Both guilty of murder thus murderers

tuxy · 07-09-2019 8:45pm

Road-Hog wrote: »

can the judge not just play it safe and to keep society safe and keep these ‘excuses of humans’ detained for as long as is legally possible....

No, the Judge can give them a life sentence after that it will eventially be in the hands of the parole board.

volchitsa · 07-09-2019 8:47pm

pinkyeye wrote: »

I don't agree with everything Kidchameleon is saying but I do think that it's a bit hypocritical to blame one set of parents and not another.

It's no-ones fault except the two boys that carried out these murders. Full stop.

Kidchameleon is blaming one set of parents, or one father anyway, namely the murdered girl's father. He feels sorry for the parents of the murderers though.

Are you really saying that's a fair enough approach?

Hannibal_Smith · 07-09-2019 9:06pm

pinkyeye wrote: »

I don't agree with everything Kidchameleon is saying but I do think that it's a bit hypocritical to blame one set of parents and not another.

It's no-ones fault except the two boys that carried out these murders. Full stop.

One set of parents and not the other? Which sets of parents are you referring to.

Tokyo · 07-09-2019 9:07pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I'm certain he blames himself, I would if I were in his position.

Mod: Okay Kidchameleon, you've made it pretty blatantly clear that this is your opinion on the situation. The majority don't share the same opinion.

So, for the sake of our collective sanity, let's agree to disagree and move on from this point and onto the other aspects of the case. Otherwise, any further attempts to continue down this track of victim blaming, and I'll have no choice but to think you're deliberately winding up other posters, and you'll be banned from the thread at the very least. And no, this is not up for debate.

Faugheen · 07-09-2019 9:10pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The alleged murderers were THIRTEEN years of age.

Just file that away for future reference.

I just hope they get a sentence that allows their identities to be revealed once they are over 18.

There’s no ‘alleged’ about it.

They are guilty of murder. They are murderers.

Faugheen · 07-09-2019 9:12pm

mike_ie wrote: »

Mod: Okay Kidchameleon, you've made it pretty blatantly clear that this is your opinion on the situation. The majority don't share the same opinion.

So, for the sake of our collective sanity, let's agree to disagree and move on from this point and onto the other aspects of the case. Otherwise, any further attempts to continue down this track of victim blaming, and I'll have no choice but to think you're deliberately winding up other posters, and you'll be banned from the thread at the very least. And no, this is not up for debate.

Jesus Christ...

headnorth · 07-09-2019 9:59pm

Papers can't print anything that might identify boy a & b , radio & tv the same. And social media folk might get locked up too. Thank god for the courts own website.

Spanish Eyes · 07-09-2019 10:09pm

The Courts Website must be in cahoots with certain opticians.

It is ridiculously small print, tiny in fact. Anwyay. Just saying it is not the most professional or accessible websites IMO.

Road-Hog · 07-09-2019 10:55pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The Courts Website must be in cahoots with certain opticians.

It is ridiculously small print, tiny in fact. Anwyay. Just saying it is not the most professional or accessible websites IMO.

I’ve seen that extract from the courts web site previously. It only gives the initials of the ‘depraved sexual deviant perverted murderers’....there are simply thousands of not more people on these islands who would share the same initials so it’s not a whole lot of use in identifying the ‘fiends’....!!

Kidchameleon · 08-09-2019 6:25am

splinter65 wrote: »

There is a very clear advantage to a murderer pleading guilty.
The advantage is to the family of the victim.
If you plead guilty then you won’t have put the family of the victim through even more agony and misery then you have already caused them, by forcing them to sit through week after week of evidence of how you brutally murdered their child, and tried to get away with it.
But the only victims you see here kidchameleon are the family of murderer b.
So that’s not clear to you.
It’s clear to any decent person with a moral compass. Just not you.

Thats some nice virtue signaling there, well done

Kidchameleon · 08-09-2019 6:32am

volchitsa wrote: »

Kidchameleon is blaming one set of parents, or one father anyway, namely the murdered girl's father. He feels sorry for the parents of the murderers though.

Are you really saying that's a fair enough approach?

I think it is very unfair to blame the parents of the murderers. They are as innocent as the Kriegels. They have done nothing to cause Anas death. Some posters in here are having a field day blaming A & B's parent's yet throw there toys out of the pram when their hypocracy is pointed out.

Kidchameleon · 08-09-2019 6:34am

mike_ie wrote: »

Mod: Okay Kidchameleon, you've made it pretty blatantly clear that this is your opinion on the situation. The majority don't share the same opinion.

So, for the sake of our collective sanity, let's agree to disagree and move on from this point and onto the other aspects of the case. Otherwise, any further attempts to continue down this track of victim blaming, and I'll have no choice but to think you're deliberately winding up other posters, and you'll be banned from the thread at the very least. And no, this is not up for debate.

Does this warning apply to people blaming the parents of the murderers or can I freely do that? Bear in mind they are innocent

pjohnson · 08-09-2019 7:28am

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Does this warning apply to people blaming the parents of the murderers or can I freely do that? Bear in mind they are innocent

They "raised" the murdering shìts. They arent innocent. I just hope they have no other children they can "raise".

You obviously think raising a murdering shìt is great but thankfully most dont.

And thats ignoring the scumbag antics of B's dad in court.

gozunda · 08-09-2019 8:18am

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The Courts Website must be in cahoots with certain opticians.

It is ridiculously small print, tiny in fact. Anwyay. Just saying it is not the most professional or accessible websites IMO.

Intersting article on the pending prosecutions for identifying the murderers

https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/ireland-nearly-a-dozen-people-referred-for-prosecution-in-relation-to-identification-of-ana-kriegel-killers

splinter65 · 08-09-2019 8:23am

You have to teach kids the difference between right and wrong.
There seems to be some kind of notion that humans if left alone will naturally be caring selfless creatures.
They won’t. They naturally turn into an Everyman for himself type creature.
You have to teach them to be kind and think of others and tell them over and over that certain behaviors are not acceptable and that there will be consequences.
You have to demonstrate it too. Lead by example.
You will see signs and symptoms of your child’s deviancy from early on. That’s the time to get help.
There’s no way you’d have a child of the wickedness of those boys in the house with you, be giving them the attention boys of that age need, and not know that there was something wrong with them.

Road-Hog · 08-09-2019 8:33am

splinter65 wrote: »

You have to teach kids the difference between right and wrong.
There seems to be some kind of notion that humans if left alone will naturally be caring selfless creatures.
They won’t. They naturally turn into an Everyman for himself type creature.
You have to teach them to be kind and think of others and tell them over and over that certain behaviors are not acceptable and that there will be consequences.
You have to demonstrate it too. Lead by example.
You will see signs and symptoms of your child’s deviancy from early on. That’s the time to get help.
There’s no way you’d have a child of the wickedness of those boys in the house with you, be giving them the attention boys of that age need, and not know that there was something wrong with them.

Would a certain amount of ‘decency’ not apply to the legal profession also? Obviously not given some of the tactics/avenues that they went down in their defence of animals A and B......?

Kidchameleon · 08-09-2019 8:59am

Road-Hog wrote: »

Would a certain amount of ‘decency’ not apply to the legal profession also? Obviously not given some of the tactics/avenues that they went down in their defence of animals A and B......?

Technically, we are all animals, you, me, Ana and those boys. Everyone

Hannibal_Smith · 08-09-2019 9:05am

Road-Hog wrote: »

Would a certain amount of ‘decency’ not apply to the legal profession also? Obviously not given some of the tactics/avenues that they went down in their defence of animals A and B......?

Everyone is entitled to a fair trial and a fair trial means a proper defence. They have a job to do and defending their client is that job.

I'm glad they got a proper defence and pulled out all the stops, they can't complain then that they didn't try everything to weasel out of their crime.

splinter65 · 08-09-2019 9:06am

Road-Hog wrote: »

Would a certain amount of ‘decency’ not apply to the legal profession also? Obviously not given some of the tactics/avenues that they went down in their defence of animals A and B......?

In order for everyone of us to be sure that justice is done, and when the accused is maintaining their innocence, then every single avenue must be explored by the defense when trying to disprove the prosecution evidence.
If the consensual sex allegation hadn’t been brought up, presented as evidence at the trial, challenged and then discounted in the trial, then it would have been brought up at a later date, possibly in an Appeal or much later in maybe a newspaper interview with a family member of one of the murderers.
This way it’s been proven in court that there was no consensual sex and it can’t rear its ugly head again.
The Kriegels would have been warned that it was going to be alleged, and would have been ready.

splinter65 · 08-09-2019 9:12am

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Technically, we are all animals, you, me, Ana and those boys. Everyone

Ana is now a dead animal torn to shreds by animals who hadn’t been taught by their parents not to behave like animals.
That’s what separates human beings from the animal kingdom, mostly.
Thankfully most of the rest of us have been lifted above the level of wild hyenas by our parents.

abff · 08-09-2019 10:18am

I know everyone is entitled to a fair trial and a proper defence, but does a proper defence include lying through your teeth and trying to besmirch the reputation of the victim?

splinter65 · 08-09-2019 10:26am

abff wrote: »

I know everyone is entitled to a fair trial and a proper defence, but does a proper defence include lying through your teeth and trying to besmirch the reputation of the victim?

Well they lied about the sex being consensual, they were very easily shown to be lying and proved themselves to be not only brutal murderers but lying cowardly brutal murderers in the process.
Ana’s reputation remains as pure as the driven snow.

Hannibal_Smith · 08-09-2019 10:55am

abff wrote: »

I know everyone is entitled to a fair trial and a proper defence, but does a proper defence include lying through your teeth and trying to besmirch the reputation of the victim?

The conduct of solicitors says:-

It is the duty of the advocate to uphold fearlessly the proper interests of his client and to protect his client’s liberty. He is entitled to state every fact freely and to use every argument, whether technical or otherwise, that may be used in accordance with the law and within the rules of professional conduct. He should resist any attempt to restrict him or his client in the performance of this task.

Interestingly, in relation to times where the client admits guilt (not saying the boys admitted anything to anyone here) but it also says:-

In criminal matters it is a matter for the jury or the court, not for the advocate for
the defence, to decide the guilt or innocence of his client. It is the duty of the solicitor for the defence to put the prosecution to proof of what it alleges and the solicitor may submit to the court that there is insufficient evidence adduced to justify a conviction.

Where, prior to the commencement or during the course of any criminal case, a client admits to his solicitor that he is guilty of the charge, it is well settled that the solicitor need only decline to act in such proceedings if the client is insistent on giving evidence to deny such guilt or requires the making of a statement asserting his innocence. Where
the client has admitted his guilt to his solicitor but will not be giving evidence, his solicitor may continue to act for him. The solicitor for the defence may also advance any other defence which obliges the prosecution to prove guilt other than protesting the client’s innocence.

Kidchameleon · 08-09-2019 10:57am

splinter65 wrote: »

Well they lied about the sex being consensual.

Nobody knows for sure. All we know is that things got out of hand

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

Comments