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

KWAG2019 · 12-11-2019 08:59PM

banie01 wrote: »

You are fixated on assigning an emotional aspect to my response.
Their isn't one, and funnily enough from your posting syntax and phrasing I'd be fairly sure that you posted similar comments towards a poster in the comments section of the article itself.
Apologies if I'm wrong, but it's quite a distinctive style.

I have no emotional involvement or indeed investment in this.
The article isn't an affront to masculinity.

It is poorly researched, emotive, knee-jerk, catch all and as I said in an earlier reply a copy and paste response that fits any violent sexual assault.

That is not emotive, that is criticism, editorialising and factual critique.

It's an affront to good journalism and half decent academics.

If you wish to respond in kind, please do?
Because given you have already ignored the prevalence of domestic violence in Lesbian relationships, it really does appear that not only are you the president and cheerleader in chief of Ms Muldoon's fan club.

Its quite clear that you have an agenda that actually precludes criticism, inspection or indeed verification of any of the claims made or the effect that may have on your quite clearly gender driven agenda.
Or is it just Mrs Muldoon's claims you think are Pulitzer worthy?

I welcome the highly emotional response you have made repeatedly here. It’s a stage. You need to get through it.

My agenda is to avoid being dragged into a tit for tat which ends in bans.

I’ll continue to look at issues of domestic violence. I don’t think there’s any point continuing to reply to you.

Spanish Eyes · 12-11-2019 09:03PM

Schoolmates will note their absence and know.

The bullying issue might need a bit of attention from the school now.

School must be a bit concerned. If it is not, well, no more to say really.

banie01 · 12-11-2019 09:05PM

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I welcome the highly emotional response you have made repeatedly here. It’s a stage. You need to get through it.

My agenda is to avoid being dragged into a tit for tat which ends in bans.

I’ll continue to look at issues of domestic violence. I don’t think there’s any point continuing to reply to you.

Again you are posting nonsense.
Your nonsense has been explained and you are refusing to grasp it.

There is no emotional component to my response, as someone else I'm fairly sure said to you today "my Fitbit is at 72".

I'd paraphrase that my MiBand is at 68.

TLDR; You are mindlessly supporting and parroting poor journalism and zero research and ascribing emotional response or involvement to people who question it.
The tradition here is attack the post, your posts on Muldoon's article are little more cogent than her article.
Coincidence?

tuxy · 12-11-2019 09:05PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Schoolmates will note their absence and know.

The bullying issue might need a bit of attention from the school now.

School must be a bit concerned. If it is not, well, no more to say really.

I'm sure everyone in that areas knows their names. Not naming them nationally should limit vigilante attacks on the families though.

iamwhoiam · 12-11-2019 09:07PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Schoolmates will note their absence and know.

The bullying issue might need a bit of attention from the school now.

School must be a bit concerned. If it is not, well, no more to say really.

Their names are known all over Leixlip and Lucan . They won’t remain anonymous in my opinion Ireland is a very small place really

banie01 · 12-11-2019 09:09PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Their names are known all over Leixlip and Lucan . They won’t remain anonymous in my opinion Ireland is a very small place really

It really is a village, we are very much all somebody's cousin and news such as their identity travelled quickly and will again come release time.

tuxy · 12-11-2019 09:11PM

Is that mirror article correct about new identities on release?
Has this been done in Ireland before and does it always fail?

Spanish Eyes · 12-11-2019 09:12PM

tuxy wrote: »

I'm sure everyone in that areas knows their names. Not naming them nationally should limit vigilante attacks on the families though.

Just wondered how the families could stay in the area now? Maybe they think their boys are innocent.

Then again they may have moved on. If they stayed they are either brazen or convinced of their son's innocence. Either way it is awful and it will come out sooner or later.

tuxy · 12-11-2019 09:16PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Just wondered how the families could stay in the area now? Maybe they think their boys are innocent.

Then again they may have moved on. If they stayed they are either brazen or convinced of their son's innocence. Either way it is awful and it will come out sooner or later.

Well boy B's family are saying he is innocent hence the possible appeal that was announced.
I think a member of Boy A's family being attacked was in the papers before the trial started.

And there have been reports that members of both boy's families have been attacked since the trial but that is unconfirmed.

tupenny · 12-11-2019 09:16PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Just wondered how the families could stay in the area now? Maybe they think their boys are innocent.

Then again they may have moved on. If they stayed they are either brazen or convinced of their son's innocence. Either way it is awful and it will come out sooner or later.

Brazen is the answer. Only need to look at creature A's grandad statement in court and creature B's dad outburst to see that.

KWAG2019 · 12-11-2019 09:18PM

If anyone is interested in moving beyond reactive and knee jerk responses to theories of domestic violence there is an excellent overview article at http://https://www2.gov.scot/resource/doc/925/0063072.pdf

It’s a genuine academic work, not pretend, and is heavy going but worth it.

McCrack · 12-11-2019 09:28PM

retro:electro wrote: »

“We need to boys and men to task”. What a ridiculous statement. The whole article is an insult to the many loving boys and men that Ana had in her life who would give anything to have her back. Ana wasn’t murdered because she happened to be anything. To say such a thing almost infers that she bears some of the responsibility of her own murder for daring to be a girl. She was murdered because the people who murdered were sadistic little bastards.

Yes however there was a sexual feature to the crime so her gender certainly had something to do with it and also being weaker physically. It's not surprising then that a female like Ana was targeted by these two

banie01 · 12-11-2019 09:30PM

KWAG2019 wrote: »

If anyone is interested in moving beyond reactive and knee jerk responses to theories of domestic violence there is an excellent overview article at http://https://www2.gov.scot/resource/doc/925/0063072.pdf

It’s a genuine academic work, not pretend, and is heavy going but worth it.

You may want to fix your link. Actually never mind I did it for you.
https://www2.gov.scot/resource/doc/925/0063072.pdf

That you think that sociological theory abstract running to 11 pages is heavy going, or that what you linked to is actually research is, to use a turn of phrase of yours "quite illuminating"

It's not research, its a glossary of terms and theories associated with domestic violence.

KWAG2019 · 12-11-2019 09:36PM

KWAG2019 wrote: »

If anyone is interested in moving beyond reactive and knee jerk responses to theories of domestic violence there is an excellent overview article at http://https://www2.gov.scot/resource/doc/925/0063072.pdf

It’s a genuine academic work, not pretend, and is heavy going but worth it.

The link isn’t working very well for me. I think it is now. The article is called Theories To explain male violence and is an overview.

tuxy · 12-11-2019 09:39PM

banie01 wrote: »

That you think that sociological theory abstract running to 11 pages is heavy going, or that what you linked to is actually research is, to use a turn of phrase of yours "quite illuminating"

Eight and a half pages written in very basic English.

KWAG2019 · 12-11-2019 09:43PM

tuxy wrote: »

Eight and a half pages written in very basic English.

Calhoun · 12-11-2019 10:12PM

banie01 wrote: »

You may want to fix your link. Actually never mind I did it for you.
https://www2.gov.scot/resource/doc/925/0063072.pdf

That you think that sociological theory abstract running to 11 pages is heavy going, or that what you linked to is actually research is, to use a turn of phrase of yours "quite illuminating"

It's not research, its a glossary of terms and theories associated with domestic violence.

I don't think somebody caught by a click bait article from the Irish Times has the mental capacity to see past their own confirmation bias.

If you engage in these type of politics that are designed to divide don't hope that there will ever be a solution or things will get better. We only have to look at the mess that is America right now to see the results of the polarization in politics.

KWAG2019 · 12-11-2019 10:33PM

Calhoun wrote: »

I don't think somebody caught by a click bait article from the Irish Times has the mental capacity to see past their own confirmation bias.

If you engage in these type of politics that are designed to divide don't hope that there will ever be a solution or things will get better. We only have to look at the mess that is America right now to see the results of the polarization in politics.

It is illuminating to see the highly emotional and personalized responses. I’m not sure why people feel so threatened. I drew attention to the article as a theoretical overview. It is academic and references other works. I’m glad some posters find it accessible, it’s actually a compliment to the authors. It shows the importance of how theoretical stance can inform policy and impact practice in people’s lives.

mrjoneill · 12-11-2019 10:38PM

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

You are totally confused regarding the difference between sentence and review.

Sentence for A was Life

Sentence for B was 15 years

Review for A is 12 years

Review for B is 8 years.

No matter how you juggle it, Boy A got the harsher sentence.

My reading of it is both beast were convicted of murder but under the Children's Act the customary mandatory life sentence does not apply rather the trial judge determines the sentence. In this case beast A, has got a conditional life sentence which will be determined after 12yrs. So in effect it cant be said for certain that this beast will get a life sentence. Should the review decide he has served his time he could well walk out of the court free without any legal restraining constraint of "licence" associated with a life sentence. The only restraint he has for certain is he is on the Sex Offenders registrar.

tuxy · 12-11-2019 10:48PM

mrjoneill wrote: »

My reading of it is both beast were convicted of murder but under the Children's Act the customary mandatory life sentence does not apply rather the trial judge determines the sentence. In this case beast A, has got a conditional life sentence which will be determined after 12yrs. So in effect it cant be said for certain that this beast will get a life sentence. Should the review decide he has served his time he could well walk out of the court free without any legal restraining constraint of "licence" associated with a life sentence. The only restraint he has for certain is he is on the Sex Offenders registrar.

My understanding is that Boy A has received a life sentence which normally does come with a recommended review date. That does not mean they will be reviewing if the life sentence sticks but that is the earliest date they will start to consider his release on licence.

banie01 · 12-11-2019 10:49PM

Calhoun wrote: »

I don't think somebody caught by a click bait article from the Irish Times has the mental capacity to see past their own confirmation bias.

If you engage in these type of politics that are designed to divide don't hope that there will ever be a solution or things will get better. We only have to look at the mess that is America right now to see the results of the polarization in politics.

See Cal, now you are just being knee jerk and emotional!
Luckily our resident SJW Muldoon lover has read some "heavy" research and your posts just illuminate the issue and highlight how many feathers have been ruffled by the penis possessors.

pinkyeye · 12-11-2019 10:54PM

Will people PLEASE stop comparing these boys to animals.

Animals do not kill for pleasure or perversion.

Spanish Eyes · 12-11-2019 10:57PM

I often think about the parents.

They are not without blame, for obvious reasons. Just saying that good parenting has a lot of responsibilities.

johnnyskeleton · 12-11-2019 10:59PM

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I see no evidence here from you to overturn her article. A lot of agitation certainly. I’ll pass this on to her so she can see if it’s worth a follow up.

Approximately 10 women are killed each year. Assuming all were murdered (as opposed to manslaughter), the perpetrator was always male and its always a unique perpetrator (i.e. not one man killing three of the women), all of which assumptions would favour her hypothesis that the problem is men murder women (rather than murderers murder people), then that is approximately 10 murders per 1.8m odd men.

Or 0.000005% chance that a man kills a woman in any given year.

Or, this year ten men killed a woman and 1,799,990 men did not.

Based on that, it seems only fair that we should implicitly excuse these individual murderers, because the other 1,799,990 are the real problem.

I mean, while we are in silly land, why dont we just say humanity is the real problem and be done with it?

Calhoun · 12-11-2019 11:11PM

KWAG2019 wrote: »

It is illuminating to see the highly emotional and personalized responses. I’m not sure why people feel so threatened. I drew attention to the article as a theoretical overview. It is academic and references other works. I’m glad some posters find it accessible, it’s actually a compliment to the authors. It shows the importance of how theoretical stance can inform policy and impact practice in people’s lives.

Its illuminating to see how easily people are taken in by these type of articles which are designed to basically divide people and opinion. Its very much a copy and paste of what goes on allot of the time across the pond.

The fact that anyone gives credibility to an article that generalizes half the population of this country and is written as an opinion piece is quite scary.

I wonder what social policy you would put in place to take men and boys to task?

donkeykong5 · 12-11-2019 11:19PM

pinkyeye wrote: »

Will people PLEASE stop comparing these boys to animals.

Animals do not kill for pleasure or perversion.

Well said .

KWAG2019 · 12-11-2019 11:26PM

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Approximately 10 women are killed each year. Assuming all were murdered (as opposed to manslaughter), the perpetrator was always male and its always a unique perpetrator (i.e. not one man killing three of the women), all of which assumptions would favour her hypothesis that the problem is men murder women (rather than murderers murder people), then that is approximately 10 murders per 1.8m odd men.

Or 0.000005% chance that a man kills a woman in any given year.

Or, this year ten men killed a woman and 1,799,990 men did not.

Based on that, it seems only fair that we should implicitly excuse these individual murderers, because the other 1,799,990 are the real problem.

I mean, while we are in silly land, why dont we just say humanity is the real problem and be done with it?

Statistics have more to say: some 70%+ of homicide victims world wide are male. Some 96% of perpetrators are make. What I like about Muldoon’s article is she calls a spade a spade. Ana was murdered because she was a girl. Only a fool could state otherwise. There was more to it certainly but ignoring her gender is just ridiculous.

Where Muldoon goes with it what has rattled cages; she refuses to accept that it’s simply a case of saying these two are extraordinary exceptions and that there’s a bigger problem. You can say 10 women a year isn’t a big problem: well that’s a point of view if a tad dismissive of 10 lives. You can look at the 19,000 cases of domestic violence as another sign of the bigger problem. Alternatively others here have pointed out the unique nature of the case in the age of the perpetrators: that too is a theoretical framing but one which ignores gender. Why ignore it. As an amusement to myself and a trigger to others I might say that an intersectional interpretation has something to be said for it.

We are all looking for solutions. Addressing male violence to females is needed. Why aren’t more males violent toward women and men? Is there a cultural message we pick up and others don’t? What messages do males pick up about violence and it’s uses? These are important questions. It’s not easy to ask them. Turn off the outrage that someone dared ask.

KWAG2019 · 12-11-2019 11:38PM

Calhoun wrote: »

I wonder what social policy you would put in place to take men and boys to task?

A real question at last. What do we want to achieve? A reduction in levels of violence from men toward women.

Does that mean we also have to look at levels of violence of men toward men?

“Taking to task” is a poor phrase by Muldoon. It’s too limited and gets certain backs up. What policies do we always recommend to limit damage from mass shootings? Limit access to weapons and stores of ammo. That is a type of taking to task.

Other social policies will be based on the theoretical framework you put in place around the problem. If only someone had offered a link to an article written in accessible English offering an overview to a general audience.

Beyond that I think it needs major educational work and support across society.

Calhoun · 12-11-2019 11:39PM

KWAG2019 wrote: »

Statistics have more to say: some 70%+ of homicide victims world wide are male. Some 96% of perpetrators are make. What I like about Muldoon’s article is she calls a spade a spade. Ana was murdered because she was a girl. Only a fool could state otherwise. There was more to it certainly but ignoring her gender is just ridiculous.

Where Muldoon goes with it what has rattled cages; she refuses to accept that it’s simply a case of saying these two are extraordinary exceptions and that there’s a bigger problem. You can say 10 women a year isn’t a big problem: well that’s a point of view if a tad dismissive of 10 lives. You can look at the 19,000 cases of domestic violence as another sign of the bigger problem. Alternatively others here have pointed out the unique nature of the case in the age of the perpetrators: that too is a theoretical framing but one which ignores gender. Why ignore it. As an amusement to myself and a trigger to others I might say that an intersectional interpretation has something to be said for it.

We are all looking for solutions. Addressing male violence to females is needed. Why aren’t more males violent toward women and men? Is there a cultural message we pick up and others don’t? What messages do males pick up about violence and it’s uses? These are important questions. It’s not easy to ask them. Turn off the outrage that someone dared ask.

Who is looking for solutions? Should we not try and stop violence towards all or is it only when its male violence on female that there is an issue?

As a male who is in the know what lesson's can you tell the rest of us heathens.

No one is outraged that you dare ask questions, if anything just pointing out the gullibility of people who reads too much into such an article. The fact its triggering you into a position where you are trying to insinuate that people are overly emotional in order to discount their views says allot.

If we want to look into this with any credibility we have to look at the role the sexes play in society overall.

mrjoneill · 12-11-2019 11:42PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

I’d imagine so.
But I’d also say it’s true. A knows well had B just did what he did and kept his mouth shut it would have been a much harder case. That Newstalk podcast with the 3 journalists all said B literally hung himself and had he’d been no comment all the way through, there’s no way he would have been convicted. Fancied himself able to pull on over the police though.
It’s still mad he got more than A but well deserved.

=========================================

Not true, beast A parents initiated their own complaint over an alleged assault on him. That's how the boots got into Garda custody. Ana's DNA was determined from the blood stains on his boots. Beast A DNA was found on Ana's body so he would have been linked by this too. Gardai would have tied in the two issues as they happened same evening same place. As for beast B while its stated he convicted himself I don't see it that way. Beast B was led through his evidence on a timeline and video evidence determined from CCTV. He repeatedly lied and lied till he was brought back into the frame through CCTV. Evidence was also given at his trial of him calling for Ana and he leading her through the park and there was also a timeline of him returning just prior to beast A. There was no forensics linking beast B to the crime scene. What beast B was convicted of was he aided & abetted in the crime. Ana's father identification + CCTV of him with Ana put him squarely in the picture. It would seem that both beast had concocted a similar story of beast A wanting to tell Ana he wasn't interested in her and beast B being just the facilitator in that, What the interview video showed was beast B is a consummate liar and anything he was to say should be taken in that context. For him going repeatedly "no comment" in video evidence being put to the jury, this would not have done him any favors either rather it would convinced them he was in the conspiracy why else would he be refusing to cooperate.

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

Comments