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

SirGerryAdams · 19-06-2019 10:11pm

NIMAN wrote: »

This is how the Internet is dangerous in the hands of idiots.

Only thing is, if a lad is named and is out and about walking the streets, going to school etc, then it's not him. Think that much would be obvious

But that doesn't make it any easier if you are innocent and brain dead folk on the Internet are naming you as a murderer.

sorry but the guy you are talking about is not being called a murderer. He's simply someone who comes up in google search. The pictures being circulated are correct!

tuxy · 19-06-2019 10:13pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

You wondered if there was an assault because she resisted the rape. She was attacked first then sexually assaulted. She did fight back though.

I could believe that if there wasn't evidence of a plan to kill her.

thecretinhop · 19-06-2019 10:14pm

my dad in 2012 nearly died due to lack of care. nothing changes

tommy de tinker burns insulated copper pipes all summer thick pungent smoke for months in area. nothing changes

autistic kids get mb 2 hours a week.
nothing changes

carers treated like dirt: nothing changes

relative suffering severe mental problems no resources nothing changes

scrote a and b brutally kill and rape. everything changes
5 star hostel x boxes breakfast made to order tv till 2am 8 staff per week.
court ready to cull anyone who wants to name them....
why do so many people want to name them?? because we are ****ing exacerbated the victim is now treated like dirt. de aggressor nearly a hero.
we have de corruption of Italy combined with de left wing version of sweeden hand wringers
wat a great wee country...

NIMAN · 19-06-2019 10:15pm

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

sorry but the guy you are talking about is not being called a murderer. He's simply someone who comes up in google search. The pictures being circulated are correct!

My reading of it was that incorrect names of Boys A&B were being published online

Is this incorrect?

I have no interest in googling names of boys,cos I don't know anyone involved in the case so itll mean nothing to me to know names

Gimme A Pound · 19-06-2019 10:15pm

thecretinhop wrote: »

de mind boggles bringing this up here. de left has found a new system where not guilty also still means guilty.
before long de likes of u would have me in de gulags if you had your way

Ah here, why can't you just type "the"?

What have you done that's so terrible you'd be sent to a gulag?

It's nothing to do with the left, it's not an opinion - it's the actual legal definition. "Not guilty" is not the same as innocent. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's incorrect or that you have grounds for accusing people of nonsense.

pjohnson · 19-06-2019 10:15pm

thecretinhop wrote: »

my dad in 2012 nearly died due to lack of care. nothing changes

tommy de tinker burns insulated copper pipes all summer thick pungent smoke for months in area. nothing changes

autistic kids get mb 2 hours a week.
nothing changes

carers treated like dirt: nothing changes

relative suffering severe mental problems no resources nothing changes

scrote a and b brutally kill and rape. everything changes
5 star hostel x boxes breakfast made to order tv till 2am 8 staff per week.
court ready to cull anyone who wants to name them....
why do so many people want to name them?? because we are ****ing exacerbated the victim is now treated like dirt. de aggressor nearly a hero.
we have de corruption of Italy combined with de left wing version of sweeden hand wringers
wat a great wee country...

Seek professional help good boy.

thecretinhop · 19-06-2019 10:15pm

pjohnson wrote: »

thecretinhop wrote: »

de mind boggles bringing this up here. de left has found a new system where not guilty also still means guilty.
before long de likes of u would have me in de gulags if you had your way

"De left" can you crying shítes not go one thread without this rubbish ffs.

i didnt go there 'mate'

pjohnson · 19-06-2019 10:17pm

thecretinhop wrote: »

i didnt go there 'mate'

No one else said "de left".

Which you since used a second time. Maybe you need conspiracy forum or something.

Hannibal_Smith · 19-06-2019 10:18pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

You wondered if there was an assault because she resisted the rape. She was attacked first then sexually assaulted. She did fight back though.

I asked whether they intended to kill her or was it something that got [further] out of hand when she defended herself. And you responded saying she was hit first and assaulted after. I took that to mean [probably a misunderstanding on my part] she was unconscious or had no reaction to what happened next.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 19-06-2019 10:18pm

tuxy wrote: »

I could believe that if there wasn't evidence of a plan to kill her.

What’s not to believe? Why does her getting attacked first not mean they didn’t plan to kill her.

From the pathologists report.

On the basis of the pathology and forensic evidence, the Garda suspected Ana had been beaten to the ground with a heavy stick shortly after entering the room, then hit four times with a heavy object such as a concrete block.

Next she was pulled towards the window, where there was more light. It was likely here she was sexually assaulted. Her false nails scattered around the room indicated she had fought her attacker fiercely.

It’s a horrible case. Upto me boy a would spend 20-25 years in jail or life at the discretion of the minister for justice. Also he would be named when an adult as a sex offender.

thecretinhop · 19-06-2019 10:19pm

pjohnson wrote: »

thecretinhop wrote: »

my dad in 2012 nearly died due to lack of care. nothing changes

tommy de tinker burns insulated copper pipes all summer thick pungent smoke for months in area. nothing changes

autistic kids get mb 2 hours a week.
nothing changes

carers treated like dirt: nothing changes

relative suffering severe mental problems no resources nothing changes

scrote a and b brutally kill and rape. everything changes
5 star hostel x boxes breakfast made to order tv till 2am 8 staff per week.
court ready to cull anyone who wants to name them....
why do so many people want to name them?? because we are ****ing exacerbated the victim is now treated like dirt. de aggressor nearly a hero.
we have de corruption of Italy combined with de left wing version of sweeden hand wringers
wat a great wee country...

Seek professional help good boy.

very droll reported.
anyway i have a very valid point that the resources needed v my above examples are a valid claim.
left wing guff?? check out ruth coppengers tweet...

SirGerryAdams · 19-06-2019 10:22pm

NIMAN wrote: »

My reading of it was that incorrect names of Boys A&B were being published online

Is this incorrect?

I have no interest in googling names of boys,cos I don't know anyone involved in the case so itll mean nothing to me to know names

I only saw one name being mentioned which I believe is correct..

Gimme A Pound · 19-06-2019 10:22pm

thecretinhop wrote: »

very droll reported.
anyway i have a very valid point that the resources needed v my above examples are a valid claim.
left wing guff?? check out ruth coppengers tweet...

I agree with your points since your post about "Not guilty". That Coppinger tweet is vile. She wrote an even worse one before it but deleted it.

mariaalice · 19-06-2019 10:23pm

I use to think the bad influence thing was often a copout, but really it does seem to be a mix of a weak and easily influenced immature teenager who lies all the time and wasn't the sporty son the father wanted mixing with someone who was a highly intelligent and manipulative teenager who clearly had something wrong with him.

If they had never met would this have happned.

Dante7 · 19-06-2019 10:23pm

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I asked whether they intended to kill her or was it something that got [further] out of hand when she defended herself. And you responded saying she was hit first and assaulted after. I took that to mean [probably a misunderstanding on my part] she was unconscious or had no reaction to what happened next.

Boy A told Boy B a month previously that he wanted to commit a murder and singled out Ana as the target.

dubdaymo · 19-06-2019 10:28pm

Whilst the law about ID'ing the boys has to be obeyed I'm of the opinion that the law never envisaged a case like this.

If a minor is found guilty of, say, robbing shops or stealing phones I can sort of understand why such a law was brought into existence - not that I agree with it. However, these were the lowest form of evil scum who deliberately planned and committed an atrocity against a poor defenceless girl. They never admitted their guilt, they showed zero remorse for what they did. In fact, one of them made disgusting, insulting remarks about the victim.

In this case there is absolutely no good reason why they should remain anonymous. They have shown that they have no respect for human life. They are a danger to society and I hope the judge will take this into consideration as he ponders his next course of action.

iamwhoiam · 19-06-2019 10:34pm

mariaalice wrote: »

I use to think the bad influence thing was often a copout, but really it does seem to be a mix of a weak and easily influenced immature teenager who lies all the time and wasn't the sporty son the father wanted mixing with someone who was a highly intelligent and manipulative teenager who clearly had something wrong with him.

If they had never met would this have happned.

I am not at all convinced that B was the weak one . The more I read the more I think he could well have been the master puppeteer .

mrjoneill · 19-06-2019 10:36pm

volchitsa wrote: »

Just because you don't understand the difference doesn't make you right.

If boy B had kept his mouth shut, like boy A did, B would likely have got away with a much lesser charge, and maybe got off completely. Would that have made him innocent?

I have looked at the same, Boy B was implicated from calling to the house for Ana. He could not explain that away & his silence would only add to the intrigue. He had to find an explanation as well as the CCTV evidence & witness statements to quell the obv disquiet. I'm sure his solicitors would have put him on the no-comment warning if there was any other way out of it. There is no way out of a person bringing another to a place where they were murdered only complicity. His lies were all countered with evidence till he tried the next one. He really believed he was able to manipulate the world the little weasel. The little crying boy that asked for permission to use the toilet, leant on his mother shoulder & held her hand, needed to be excused from the awful forensic evidence that he was directly involved in, the same weasel that called his victim a "slut, weirdo, not seen dead with" thinking he was able to manipulate his questioners. Prob Boy B is the real leader of the plot that Boy A carried out as he was the more polished & brightest under interrogation. The greatest ever to deflect. His last statement to his psychologist again contradicting his last Garda statement, he only realized that Boys B crotch of his pants was open when he stood up. Boy B wore tracksuit-bottoms. He does not tell us how Boys A semen stains got on Ana body & her clothes. We also find there is an unidentified DNA which is very mysterious. I would not be the least surprised Boy B played an active participation in it. I would not be least surprised that he actually pulled the clothes off her body while the other scumbag held her down. What amazes me of these types is how 2 of the same mindset came together. Without each other there is a great likelihood Ana would be still alive as Boy A had not the neck to entice her without an accomplice & this also gave support to the plan. Boy B intrigues have run out of road, he needs 20yrs to think over what he did in very harsh prison conditions

Kevhog1988 · 19-06-2019 10:36pm

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I am not at all convinced that B was the weak one . The more I read the more I think he could well have been the master puppeteer .

I thought Boy A was. The horrific porn etc would lead me to believe he was the one who planned it.

19-06-2019 10:39pm

mariaalice wrote: »

I use to think the bad influence thing was often a copout, but really it does seem to be a mix of a weak and easily influenced immature teenager who lies all the time and wasn't the sporty son the father wanted mixing with someone who was a highly intelligent and manipulative teenager who clearly had something wrong with him.

If they had never met would this have happned.

Going by the Irish Times article Boy B appeared as highly intelligent and astute during the Garda interviews. However further down the opinion of a psychologist found him to be immature and lacking in boundaries. I don't think it is as clear cut as one boy being 'this' way and the other boy being 'that' way.

Fusitive · 19-06-2019 10:40pm

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I am not at all convinced that B was the weak one . The more I read the more I think he could well have been the master puppeteer .

Boy B was not a master puppeteer, if he was, he gave away the biggest clue to the case by directly putting himself in the line of suspicion by calling to Ana's house while the other boy was hiding away.

GreeBo · 19-06-2019 10:40pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I think bullies at school age work in packs, herd mentality. What do they do with them then?

There is typically a ring leader though, that's the one you turf out.

justmyimput · 19-06-2019 10:41pm

and boy a will most likely do it again to another innocent person because nobody can recognize him or know his name because our justice system is protecting the monsters, giving new names, a chance at a new life when they took poor ana’s life away from her. sick scums need to stay behind bars for the rest of their lives and not just another 4 years till they’re 18.

Fakediamond · 19-06-2019 10:41pm

airy fairy wrote: »

Perhaps this has been asked and discussed already, but as boy A has been charged with aggravated sexual assault along with the murder, is that not grounds to be put on the sex offenders list? Surely then his anonymity cannot be kept?

The Sex Offenders Register is not a public document and is administered And kept by Gardai for public safety reasons. Other agencies such as Tusla and Probation Service will also likely be aware of who is in the register, but not the general public, or the next door neighbours, etc.

iamwhoiam · 19-06-2019 10:42pm

theemigrant wrote: »

I thought Boy A was. The horrific porn etc would lead me to believe he was the one who planned it.

B knew A had a problem and knew his desire and possibly showed him the path and led him down
We will never know now I guess because both are lying through their teeth to cover their own ass

Dante7 · 19-06-2019 10:44pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Going by the Irish Times article Boy B appeared as highly intelligent and astute during the Garda interviews. However further down the opinion of a psychologist found him to be immature and lacking in boundaries. I don't think it is as clear cut as one boy being 'this' way and the other boy being 'that' way.

The psychologist who was hired by the defence and who didn't even review the Garda interviews before submitting his report? The Judge was correct it ruling it as inadmissable.

_blaaz · 19-06-2019 10:45pm

It would more of a concern from a brief reading on this there was very limited dna evidence

I think myself.they.were 100% guilty....but afaik.if that boy A had not lied and siad he was assulted.in the park,gaurds would never have.taken his runners and her blood not been found on it

Them.2 would have lied their way to freedom....there was a fair amount of planning/prep went into this,a degree of organisation that is rarely seen outside of gangland murders

Patrick2010 · 19-06-2019 10:46pm

From all reports Ana was quite a strong girl, 5’ 8” and well built. It’s unlikely boy A could have overpowered her without the help of his accomplice who led her to him.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 10:46pm

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Because if A left her there knowing she could be still alive it shows that there is no question of the intent to kill.

As for morbid. The whole case is morbid, not least because she was killed in a gruesome way by children.

So the reason you're dreaming up various morbid scenarios is to try and somehow prove Boy A intended to kill Ana? He was found guilty of murder. It's obvious he intended to kill her. Just quit the ghoulishness, it's disrespectful and utterly pointless.

fryup · 19-06-2019 10:47pm

iamwhoiam wrote: »

B knew A had a problem and knew his desire and possibly showed him the path and led him down
We will never know now I guess because both are lying through their teeth to cover their own ass

maybe..Boy A got a kick from doing it, and Boy B got a kick from watching it

SirGerryAdams · 19-06-2019 10:48pm

The file with question about boy A....where was that?? On his PC? Or what?

dickangel · 19-06-2019 10:51pm

Patrick2010 wrote: »

From all reports Ana was quite a strong girl, 5’ 8” and well built. It’s unlikely boy A could have overpowered her without the help of his accomplice who led her to him.

Boy A was tall for his age and skilled in martial arts, he also seemingly got injured in the process. I don't think it's likely Boy B helped, there was no DNA on him.

mrjoneill · 19-06-2019 10:56pm

dickangel wrote: »

Boy A was tall for his age and skilled in martial arts, he also seemingly got injured in the process. I don't think it's likely Boy B helped, there was no DNA on him.

She was stripped naked, not easy while holding down a person that was very strong and fit. Boy B stated she put up her hands to remove her clothing, he seems to know a lot how they were removed.

tuxy · 19-06-2019 10:56pm

_blaaz wrote: »

I think myself.they.were 100% guilty....but afaik.if that boy A had not lied and siad he was assulted.in the park,gaurds would never have.taken his runners and her blood not been found on it

His DNA(semen) was on her dead body. They would have found and convicted boy A under almost every circumstance I can think of.

Patrick2010 wrote: »

From all reports Ana was quite a strong girl, 5’ 8” and well built. It’s unlikely boy A could have overpowered her without the help of his accomplice who led her to him.

Really? By all accounts Boy A was also tall and strong being male I don't see why he wouldn't have been able to overpower her, especially when he had planned it out.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 10:57pm

mrjoneill wrote: »

She was stripped naked, not easy while holding down a person that was very strong and fit. Boy B stated she put up her hands to remove her clothing, he seems to know a lot how they were removed.

So how does one person get covered in DNA and the other have no trace at all?

Sunflower 27 · 19-06-2019 10:58pm

dickangel wrote: »

So the reason you're dreaming up various morbid scenarios is to try and somehow prove Boy A intended to kill Ana? He was found guilty of murder. It's obvious he intended to kill her. Just quit the ghoulishness, it's disrespectful and utterly pointless.

I'm not dreaming anything up. It is how she was found.

His defense tried to claim it was not premeditated.

It clearly was if she was left to die while A walked off. The way she was found made me question that.

volchitsa · 19-06-2019 11:00pm

She'd been hit on the back of the head to start off. That alone would have made her much more vulnerable than if both had started off face to face and then it degenerated from there. So not impossible that a strong boy who knew some martial arts could have overpowered her on his own.
It is odd the other boy seems to have stood there and done nothing, but there was none of his DNA on her, not identifiable anyway. That's actually why I wonder if he wasn't in fact the instigator.

Hoboo · 19-06-2019 11:01pm

mrjoneill wrote: »

She was stripped naked, not easy while holding down a person that was very strong and fit. Boy B stated she put up her hands to remove her clothing, he seems to know a lot how they were removed.

Not wanting to speculate on something so horrible, it doesn't take a genius to work it out.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 11:01pm

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

I'm not dreaming anything up. It is how she was found.

His defense tried to claim it was not premeditated.

It clearly was if she was left to die while A walked off. The way she was found made me question that.

I think the fact that it took over 40 mins for the list of injuries to be read out is evidence enough that the intent was to kill. There's literally no doubt, hence why he was found guilty of murder.

Dante7 · 19-06-2019 11:03pm

dickangel wrote: »

So how does one person get covered in DNA and the other have no trace at all?

Where are you getting that Boy A was covered in Ana's DNA? His DNA was (semen) was found on Ana, of the other way round.

dickangel · 19-06-2019 11:04pm

Dante7 wrote: »

Where are you getting that Boy A was covered in Ana's DNA? His DNA was (semen) was found on Ana, of the other way round.

Are you serious? There was blood all over his belongings. It was key evidence.

strandroad · 19-06-2019 11:04pm

Dante7 wrote: »

Where are you getting that Boy A was covered in Ana's DNA? His DNA was (semen) was found on Ana, of the other way round.

Her blood was on his clothes etc., multiple locations.

Dante7 · 19-06-2019 11:04pm

Wombatman · 19-06-2019 11:05pm

tayto lover wrote: »

Again.

1. Boy A told him he was going to murder Ana.
Boy B said he didn't believe him. Why did Boy B volunteer this info to incriminate himself? Boy B lied so much, his testimony is worthless, so why believe this part?

2. Boy B took her to the scene of her death. CCTV proves this also her father saw him at the door.
Does not equate to murder if he did not know what Boy A had planned.

3. Boy B supplied the stick tape used to subdue her.
Does not equate to murder if he did not know what Boy A had planned.

4. Boy B watches it all and doesn’t help or even ask Boy A to stop.
Does not equate to murder.

5. In his interviews Boy B refers to Ana as dressing like a slut. No remorse.
Does not equate to murder.

6. Boy B changes his story at least 9 times in his questioning.
Does not equate to murder.

7. The interviewing detectives describe him as being smart conniving and confident little ****.
Does not equate to murder.

8. The cctv also showed him coming back a good bit later from the scene than he said. So he hung around enjoying it all.
Any proof what he did at this time?

I really can’t see him beating this rap and hopefully the little murderer will have a long painful life in custody.

People need to understand that for Boy B to be guilty of murder the prosecution must prove either:

1. He participated in the act of killing
or
2. He helped Boy A with the murder in the full knowledge of what Boy A was about to do.

From what I have read there is no proof for one.

The IT article addresses point two.

Nevertheless, it only got them so far. Boy B was shown repeatedly lying to gardaí, but there was zero forensic evidence linking him to the killing. In order to prove murder, the prosecution needed to prove he knew the plan that day was to kill Ana. To do this they relied heavily on Boy B’s admission that Boy A had asked him a month earlier if he wanted to kill the girl.

The entire case against Boy B would essentially boil down to one issue: Did he believe Boy A when he said this or did he think he was joking? If the former was true Boy B was guilty, if it was the latter he was innocent.

This is will be the main focus of Boy B's appeal

From the IT Article

One of the main objectives of Boy B’s defence team was to have the jury hear the evidence of Dr Humphries, the psychologist who examined the teen at the start of the year and determined he had been traumatised by witnessing the attack on Ana.

In the absence of the jury, Humphries repeated what he said in his report, that the trauma caused Boy B to tell the gardaí “untruths”. The doctor said he didn’t like to use the word “lie” because he didn’t want to seem judgmental.

He told Colgan the boy was bright but naive and immature. By way of illustration, he said that, during his stay in Oberstown, Boy B had asked for Lego to play with – a request the staff had never had before.

Grehan’s cross-examination of Humphries for the prosecution was easily the most combative of the entire trial. Counsel took particular issue with the doctor’s assertion that Boy B had “no knowledge of a plan for murder”.

Grehan said this was a matter for the jury. He said the doctor’s report contained a lot of jargon but there “doesn’t appear to be any engagement with the facts of the interviews”.

He submitted that allowing the doctor’s evidence into the trial would trespass on the function of the jury as the judges of fact and effectively make Humphries a “13th juror”. After taking the night to think about it, McDermott excluded the doctor’s evidence entirely.

All of Boy Bs testimony will become junk if it is accepted that "the trauma [by witnessing the attack on Ana] caused Boy B to tell the gardaí “untruths”.

Boy B's conviction is entirely based on his own testimony.

If there were text messages, recordings, notes etc between the two for example, detailing a pact or plan to kill Ana, this would be solid proof that Boy B knew.

Why during deliberations did the jury ask for DVDs of seven of Boy B’s Garda interviews?

19-06-2019 11:05pm

Dante7 wrote: »

The psychologist who was hired by the defence and who didn't even review the Garda interviews before submitting his report? The Judge was correct it ruling it as inadmissable.

Yes the very same. My point is that we don't know with any certainty who these boys are, or indeed what they are. I've been thinking a lot on this case. I haven't a clue as to what went on in the minds of Boy A and Boy B. Were they both the product of a dysfunctional home? Did they fit the criteria for Cluster B personality disorders? Were they simply bad? Was one the ring leader and if so which one?
Its horrendous. Poor Ana and her poor family.

Strazdas · 19-06-2019 11:05pm

volchitsa wrote: »

She'd been hit on the back of the head to start off. That alone would have made her much more vulnerable than if both had started off face to face and then it degenerated from there. So not impossible that a strong boy who knew some martial arts could have overpowered her on his own.
It is odd the other boy seems to have stood there and done nothing, but there was none of his DNA on her, not identifiable anyway. That's actually why I wonder if he wasn't in fact the instigator.

The pathologist suggested that the physical attack indeed came first followed by the sexual assault.

The prosecution case was that B watched on voyeuristically.....this was in their opening arguments

donkeykong5 · 19-06-2019 11:05pm

tayto lover wrote: »

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I wondered this too. But apparently she was hit as soon as she walked into where Boy A was. So it doesn't seem like she was able to defend herself?

I read yesterday that when she went missing police were searching the park and came across a man and a boy out for a walk. They stopped to talk to the police. They later discovered it was Boy A and his dad. There he was walking through the park with his dad chatting to police all the while knowing she was dead because of her in that manky place.

The teacher said he was an intelligent boy with not an ounce of trouble from him.

You never think of something like this happening and to think two 13 year old came up with it, carried it out a d calmly tried to get away with it. It's crazy stuff

Ana fought like a tiger for her life. She had defensive wounds. Her nails were broken.
Jaysus lads read the court reports. It’s all there.

Poor girl. She really had a terrible death. It's awful reading what she went through. It's like a horror story and then you suddenly realise it's all true. Hope those protected boys rot in hell.

pjohnson · 19-06-2019 11:07pm

anewme · 19-06-2019 11:11pm

People recounting here in graphic detail what happened to Ana in that place is too much to bear.

Locals want it levelled, despite its history and I dont blame them.

iamwhoiam · 19-06-2019 11:12pm

The unfairness in a lot of peoples eyes that Ana was not afforded the same protection . Her life , her difficulties , her struggles , her pain , her horrific death was on every single newspaper for weeks on end . No one gave her protection from that

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

Comments