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

tuxy · 29-10-2019 10:07PM

kravmaga wrote: »

I can see them getting 15 years each, thats just my opinion

12 years before it comes up for review then 3 years before release. Or that it comes up for review sooner and is denied a few times?

iamwhoiam · 29-10-2019 10:10PM

cgcsb wrote: »

You only need one sicko and one idiot

Which one do you think is which ?

kravmaga · 29-10-2019 10:18PM

tuxy wrote: »

12 years before it comes up for review then 3 years before release. Or that it comes up for review sooner and is denied a few times?

Possibly, that said I think the Judge has a tough job on sentencing on this case

tuxy · 29-10-2019 10:21PM

kravmaga wrote: »

Possibly, that said I think the Judge has a tough job on sentencing on this case

I really think/hope he has to go for life sentences for both of them. Even at the risk that there may be an appeal.
The recommendation for when it should be up for review is the difficult part.

Stallingrad · 29-10-2019 10:25PM

cgcsb wrote: »

Oh do spare us the Helen Lovejoy spiel. He didn't kill her because he watched a horror movie or pornography, he killed her because he's a little psycho people like him have always been and always will and it's nothing to do with some sexist telling them they have responsibility based on their gender

If you think there is something wrong in trying to engender those values in young men then I hope you don't have a son. My get off screens comment was aimed at both parents and children, and yes, I do believe young, vulnerable children's sense of empathy can be damaged by exposure to extreme porn, which boy A was watching.

omega man · 29-10-2019 10:52PM

Stallingrad wrote: »

If you think there is something wrong in trying to engender those values in young men then I hope you don't have a son. My get off screens comment was aimed at both parents and children, and yes, I do believe young, vulnerable children's sense of empathy can be damaged by exposure to extreme porn, which boy A was watching.

Bit of a difference between “getting off the screens” and watching extreme porn in all honesty.

iamwhoiam · 29-10-2019 10:53PM

I just watched Prime Time . What a beautiful family Ana had , what a lovely kind girl she was . The VIS is heartbreaking yet beautiful . I hope her family can find peace and with lots of help and support can remember the good times with Ana .
RIP Ana

SirChenjin · 29-10-2019 11:46PM

Way back on this thread I said that no matter what happened as a result of the trial, nothing would comfort Ana's family. I was told by another poster - and I quote - that what I said was 'untrue and unhelpful'.

Sadly I do have some insight into how it feels to lose a loved one in violent circumstances.

I can't even express how I feel listening to what Mrs Kriegel said today. So much of it, in fact every word of it is heartbreaking, but possibly the most poignant line, to me, was that Ana hoped that 'everyone she met would be nice.'

Once more, I just want to say that I cannot commend enough the dignity of the Kriegel family, in the face of this absolute horror, and the diligence of the Gardaí and all concerned, who worked tirelessly to bring that pair successfully to trial.

May they get the sentences hat they fully deserve.
May that beautiful innocent child rest in peace.

Hellrazer · 30-10-2019 12:30AM

SirChenjin wrote: »

I can't even express how I feel listening to what Mrs Kriegel said today. So much of it, in fact every word of it is heartbreaking, but possibly the most poignant line, to me, was that Ana hoped that 'everyone she met would be nice.'

The same here-I was listening to the statement on the way home in the car and literally had tears running down my face driving.

Couldn't help thinking what if it was my 13 year old daughter that these 2 scumbags had murdered.

I really hope the judge does the right thing and gives them the maximum sentence available to him but Im holding my breath on that one knowing the ****ed up justice system we have in this country.

Vicarious Function · 30-10-2019 09:07AM

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/boy-as-grandfather-much-loved-grandson-incredibly-remorseful-for-what-happened-960438.html

At first when people heard that Boy A's Grandfather had stated that

his grandchild was a loving, caring and kind child, who never showed aggression or ill-temper

We were outraged at the insensitivity of such a statement in the presence of the Kriegels. Taken as a whole the Grandad spoke well. How bewildered must he be at how his beloved Grandson could have behaved in the way he did. How totally unexpected if this is the way he had perceived his grandson. Of course he is going to try and speak favorably of the boy in order to get the sentence reduced. Obviously the man really can't come to terms wirth what has happened - a form of denial, possibly. He can't see the evil in his grandson and is determined to support him after the sentence is imposed. The man deserves our sympathy - on second thoughts.

iamwhoiam · 30-10-2019 09:20AM

I used the think they should show the boys photos and warn us all about them .Now I am glad they did not , they should get no attention or notoriety from this
We know how wonderful Ana was and her lovely photos and her enjoying herself .Let us all remember Ana and not give the boys any notion that they are in any way gaining attention or notoriety .

HildaOgdenx · 30-10-2019 09:36AM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

We know how wonderful Ana was and her lovely photos and her enjoying herself .Let us all remember Ana and not give the boys any notion that they are in any way gaining attention or notoriety .

Completely agree.

volchitsa · 30-10-2019 09:48AM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/boy-as-grandfather-much-loved-grandson-incredibly-remorseful-for-what-happened-960438.html

At first when people heard that Boy A's Grandfather had stated that

We were outraged at the insensitivity of such a statement in the presence of the Kriegels. Taken as a whole the Grandad spoke well. How bewildered must he be at how his beloved Grandson could have behaved in the way he did. How totally unexpected if this is the way he had perceived his grandson. Of course he is going to try and speak favorably of the boy in order to get the sentence reduced. Obviously the man really can't come to terms wirth what has happened - a form of denial, possibly. He can't see the evil in his grandson and is determined to support him after the sentence is imposed. The man deserves our sympathy - on second thoughts.

I wouldn't actually blame the grandfather, I think he did the best he could. But I just don't understand why the families of the two criminals are expected/allowed to speak at all TBH.

If what they had to say was important (and as you point out, he's going to be smoothing over anything negative in the boy's past activities anyway so as not to make things worse for him, so it's not terribly useful anyway) that could have been done as a written report given to the judge.

But TBH even then, what could he possibly have to say that should influence the judge's opinion in any way?

MadYaker · 30-10-2019 09:58AM

From reading the Irish times it sounds like boy a will get a life sentence with a review in ten years, potentially for extension as well as release. Boy b could get something much more lenient, short stint in oberstown followed by a long parole. Though he could also get life but I think that’s unlikely.

salmocab · 30-10-2019 10:01AM

volchitsa wrote: »

I wouldn't actually blame the grandfather, I think he did the best he could. But I just don't understand why the families of the two criminals are expected/allowed to speak at all TBH.

If what they had to say was important (and as you point out, he's going to be smoothing over anything negative in the boy's past activities anyway so as not to make things worse for him, so it's not terribly useful anyway) that could have been done as a written report given to the judge.

But TBH even then, what could he possibly have to say that should influence the judge's opinion in any way?

Well it is probably useful in a lot of cases, it gives background and tells the judge what kind of family or how they are in the community. It can give an indicator of whether a crime is a once off or something more. The problem here is people are emotionally involved in this case but the court has to treat them like any other convicted people would be and they have to be afforded the same rights.

iamwhoiam · 30-10-2019 10:20AM

MadYaker wrote: »

From reading the Irish times it sounds like boy a will get a life sentence with a review in ten years, potentially for extension as well as release. Boy b could get something much more lenient, short stint in oberstown followed by a long parole. Though he could also get life but I think that’s unlikely.

I hope they both get a sentence that would mean they are transferred to an adult prison .I say this because they should live with that fear of being in prison rather than in the holiday camp of Oberstown .

volchitsa · 30-10-2019 10:24AM

salmocab wrote: »

Well it is probably useful in a lot of cases, it gives background and tells the judge what kind of family or how they are in the community. It can give an indicator of whether a crime is a once off or something more. The problem here is people are emotionally involved in this case but the court has to treat them like any other convicted people would be and they have to be afforded the same rights.

I wasn't just talking about this case, it's a general objection. Personally I don't think people should be judged by their family background. I really hate all this "Oh he comes from a good family" stuff.

in this particular case, as they're children, I figure that if it's relevant, it should appear in some other way, particularly the psychologists' report but could be in background info from the police too. Or ask less emotionally involved people who know him like teachers. Because how likely is it that the family will provide anything other than a carefully-spun version of what the boy is like. Or maybe they even believe it. Doesn't make it true though. Maybe their blindness to what he was really like stopped them from getting help long ago.

Also, if they don't give a statement, like Boy B's dad, does the judge take that into account against him? And if not, that begs my question about what use it is again.

salmocab · 30-10-2019 10:39AM

volchitsa wrote: »

I wasn't just talking about this case, it's a general objection. Personally I don't think people should be judged by their family background. I really hate all this "Oh he comes from a good family" stuff.

in this particular case, as they're children, I figure that if it's relevant, it should appear in some other way, particularly the psychologists' report but could be in background info from the police too. Or ask less emotionally involved people who know him like teachers. Because how likely is it that the family will provide anything other than a carefully-spun version of what the boy is like. Or maybe they even believe it. Doesn't make it true though. Maybe their blindness to what he was really like stopped them from getting help long ago.

Also, if they don't give a statement, like Boy B's dad, does the judge take that into account against him? And if not, that begs my question about what use it is again.

They’ve already been judged though, now it’s time to find an appropriate punishment, the judge looks for a lot of information before deciding. People were also complaining about defense tactics in the thread and giving out about the solicitors/barristers. The natural thing here is to just hate the pair of them but that’s just internet noise it means nothing to the case, the judge gives people a chance to speak up now from both sides before deciding on the punishment and that seems to be both fair and reduce the chances of things coming out in the future that might result in more attention.

Ash.J.Williams · 30-10-2019 10:41AM

volchitsa wrote: »

I wasn't just talking about this case, it's a general objection. Personally I don't think people should be judged by their family background. I really hate all this "Oh he comes from a good family" stuff.

in this particular case, as they're children, I figure that if it's relevant, it should appear in some other way, particularly the psychologists' report but could be in background info from the police too. Or ask less emotionally involved people who know him like teachers. Because how likely is it that the family will provide anything other than a carefully-spun version of what the boy is like. Or maybe they even believe it. Doesn't make it true though. Maybe their blindness to what he was really like stopped them from getting help long ago.

Also, if they don't give a statement, like Boy B's dad, does the judge take that into account against him? And if not, that begs my question about what use it is again.

the old GAA defence

he comes form a great GAA family

Vicarious Function · 30-10-2019 10:41AM

volchitsa wrote: »

.....

Also, if they don't give a statement, like Boy B's dad, does the judge take that into account against him? And if not, that begs my question about what use it is again.

It's a pity Boy B's father did not attend Court yesterday. Maybe he woud have learned something by being present and hearing what everybody had to say. Regarding a relative making a statement on behalf of Boy B, that would a bit problematic, as Boy B totally does not accept the Guilty Verdict that has been handed down to him. Better not say anything under the circumstances.

Hopefully, Boy B's father will attend the sentencing next Tuesday. Maybe it's an overstatement - but he really needs to Man Up, IMO.

KWAG2019 · 30-10-2019 10:51AM

volchitsa wrote: »

I wouldn't actually blame the grandfather, I think he did the best he could. But I just don't understand why the families of the two criminals are expected/allowed to speak at all TBH.

If what they had to say was important (and as you point out, he's going to be smoothing over anything negative in the boy's past activities anyway so as not to make things worse for him, so it's not terribly useful anyway) that could have been done as a written report given to the judge.

But TBH even then, what could he possibly have to say that should influence the judge's opinion in any way?

I already posted about the grandfather so I won’t go there again. There is a need for statements on behalf of the convicted criminals but I think you are right when you say they could be written and submitted but made public and referred to in sentencing by the judge. That would leave the focus where it should be and the balance where it should be and remove the illusion that a judge has to strike a balance between competing claims. The focus after conviction must always be on the victim. Ana Kriegel. Of course, the illusion that the judge has competing claims of equal merit before them is useful to some.

shesty · 30-10-2019 10:55AM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

It's a pity Boy B's father did not attend Court yesterday. Maybe he woud have learned something by being present and hearing what everybody had to say. Regarding a relative making a statement on behalf of Boy B, that would a bit problematic, as Boy B totally does not accept the Guilty Verdict that has been handed down to him. Better not say anything under the circumstances.

Hopefully, Boy B's father will attend the sentencing next Tuesday. Maybe it's an overstatement - but he really needs to Man Up, IMO.

I think I read there has been a rift and he isn't speaking to the boy because he believes his son should have 'manned up' basically and stopped it, rather than running away?

I remember thinking I could understand that but equally, his own behaviour hasn't exactly been the best example for his son.

mcgovern · 30-10-2019 10:56AM

Vicarious Function wrote: »

It's a pity Boy B's father did not attend Court yesterday. Maybe he woud have learned something by being present and hearing what everybody had to say. Regarding a relative making a statement on behalf of Boy B, that would a bit problematic, as Boy B totally does not accept the Guilty Verdict that has been handed down to him. Better not say anything under the circumstances.

Hopefully, Boy B's father will attend the sentencing next Tuesday. Maybe it's an overstatement - but he really needs to Man Up, IMO.

Boy Bs dad apologised to the Kriegels privately after the original verdict.

volchitsa · 30-10-2019 11:01AM

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I already posted about the grandfather so I won’t go there again. There is a need for statements on behalf of the convicted criminals but I think you are right when you say they could be written and submitted but made public and referred to in sentencing by the judge. That would leave the focus where it should be and the balance where it should be and remove the illusion that a judge has to strike a balance between competing claims. The focus after conviction must always be on the victim. Ana Kriegel. Of course, the illusion that the judge has competing claims of equal merit before them is useful to some.

I don't see why there is a need for statements from the families of the convicted people.

If there really is a need, then what do you think is the consequence of there being nobody to make such a statement on behalf of someone? Boy B being only one example - someone else may have lost contact with their family.

volchitsa · 30-10-2019 11:06AM

mcgovern wrote: »

Boy Bs dad apologised to the Kriegels privately after the original verdict.

This is the man who roared out in court? Presumably he apologised for that rather than for the boy's actions?

Suckit · 30-10-2019 11:07AM

shesty wrote: »

I think I read there has been a rift and he isn't speaking to the boy because he believes his son should have 'manned up' basically and stopped it, rather than running away?

I remember thinking I could understand that but equally, his own behaviour hasn't exactly been the best example for his son.

The father sounds like he is very confused and probably the worst person to be dealing with it. From ignoring the Gardaí at the door to shouting in court to falling out with his son and not turning up at the sentencing.

There have been a few references already to Boy B's intelligence. The father may be already unable to deal with him on that level.
The father may have wanted hs son to 'man up'. But by saying it over a year after the fact, won't change things. His father is probably as angered and feels as helpless as the rest of us. Wishing he could go back and change things, catch them etc..
It is also possible he found out more than he bargained for when talking to his son about that days events.

Irish Times today.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sentencing-over-ana-kri%C3%A9gel-murder-surrounded-by-complicated-law-1.4066287

When members of the Oireachtas set down legislation for the sentencing of young offenders in 2001, it appears it never entered their minds that some of those offenders would be murderers barely out of primary school.
As a result, the sentencing of children for murder and other crimes, which could ordinarily attract a lengthy sentence, has been fraught with difficulty ever since.

It seems odd to me that they didn't take these possibilities into account, considering the James Bulger case was 8 years prior to that. They should have at least taken the possibility into account.

salmocab · 30-10-2019 11:08AM

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I already posted about the grandfather so I won’t go there again. There is a need for statements on behalf of the convicted criminals but I think you are right when you say they could be written and submitted but made public and referred to in sentencing by the judge. That would leave the focus where it should be and the balance where it should be and remove the illusion that a judge has to strike a balance between competing claims. The focus after conviction must always be on the victim. Ana Kriegel. Of course, the illusion that the judge has competing claims of equal merit before them is useful to some.

This is sentencing, surely the focus should be on the convicted at this point?

mcgovern · 30-10-2019 11:21AM

volchitsa wrote: »

This is the man who roared out in court? Presumably he apologised for that rather than for the boy's actions?

He apologised for what happened to Ana from what I heard, without either admitting or denying his sons involvement.

KWAG2019 · 30-10-2019 11:32AM

salmocab wrote: »

This is sentencing, surely the focus should be on the convicted at this point?

Only to the extent that they have been convicted of a crime committed on a victim. The victim is the one to remember and focus on in arriving at a sentence appropriate to the crime committed on the victim.

volchitsa · 30-10-2019 11:35AM

mcgovern wrote: »

He apologised for what happened to Ana from what I heard, without either admitting or denying his sons involvement.

Seems to me he'd do better to apologise for his own actions. He alone is responsible for those after all.

Anyway, apologising for what happened to Ana while refusing to accept his son's responsibility is pointless - if his son is innocent, what does he have to apologise for? And if he knows he's not innocent, then he shouldn't pretend to think he is.

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

Comments