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

Road-Hog

mrjoneill wrote: »

Boy B made a statement on the first day implicating meeting Boy A.They were then free to go till arrested 10days after. I understand Boy A & Boy B hung out together during that period walking the streets of theirarea together. They tough they had beaten the sys.

I’m surprised the defense barristers didn’t try to get the cctv footage deemed inadmissible based on GDPR leglisation.......if a local authority or gardai can’t demonstrate why a camera is in a particular location ie that they followed a proper protocol before erecting/installing the camera and have proper procedures in place for the storing and subsequent deletion of the footage after a particular time period then the ‘cameras’ and footage from same could be deemed illegally obtained and not useable in court....?

tuxy

I'll publicly agree, the posting of the video along with the description of yourself was weird.
But as I said the rest of the post was fine.

Balagan1

Ironic and more than a little sad, that in a discussion on the brutal death of a young girl whose murderers labelled her "weird", the description "weird" is being applied to other posters.

Kidchameleon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

Balagan1 wrote: »

Ironic and more than a little sad, that in a discussion on the brutal death of a young girl whose murderers labelled her "weird", the description "weird" is being applied to other posters.

And nobody would have noticed if you hadn't pointed it out. Streisand effect in full swing.

Strazdas

tuxy wrote: »

Later he admitted to misunderstanding the law. He was under the impression that he could only get a small punishment lasting a few weeks at most since he didn't actually do any of the physical harm. That's possibly why he was so calm.

One wonders if this was even a factor in Ana's murder ie. he thought it would be 'no big deal' to lure her to the abandoned house, even though he was aware B intended to harm her.

Eric Cartman

Strazdas wrote: »

One wonders if this was even a factor in Ana's murder ie. he thought it would be 'no big deal' to lure her to the abandoned house, even though he was aware B intended to harm her.

I think you mean A intended,

but yeah it has crossed my mind, if B did know id imagine there was some sort of sick manipulating discussion where A told him "nobody will care, nobody will come looking" , I was always somebody who made an effort to talk to everybody , even the 'weird' kid in school , its strange to think how that little bit of outreach could actually save a life from this kind of monstrosity.

Strazdas

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think you mean A intended,

but yeah it has crossed my mind, if B did know id imagine there was some sort of sick manipulating discussion where A told him "nobody will care, nobody will come looking" , I was always somebody who made an effort to talk to everybody , even the 'weird' kid in school , its strange to think how that little bit of outreach could actually save a life from this kind of monstrosity.

Sorry 'A' intended, yes. But it could explain how he somehow would rationalise in his mind bringing Ana to A. It would reflect terribly on him of course and still makes him a murderer in the eyes of the law.

There are so many ifs and buts here sadly. If Ana's mam had been home, she would have run that little git from the door and told him not to come back.

Eric Cartman

Strazdas wrote: »

Sorry 'A' intended, yes. But it could explain how he somehow would rationalise in his mind bringing Ana to A. It would reflect terribly on him of course and still makes him a murderer in the eyes of the law.

There are so many ifs and buts here sadly. If Ana's mam had been home, she would have run that little git from the door and told him not to come back.

I dont think a 13 year old lad thinks in that many domensions on any issue.

tuxy

Where has Brenton gone?

Fakediamond

If the house was a known teenage haunt, how come it wasn’t teenagers who found Ana first? Do you think the local teens already knew what had happened and where she was and were therefore avoiding the house during the searches?

tuxy

Fakediamond wrote: »

If the house was a known teenage haunt, how come it wasn’t teenagers who found Ana first? Do you think the local teens already knew what had happened and where she was and were therefore avoiding the house during the searches?

I very much doubt it. Excluding those two boys most people have some level of empathy.

tuxy

tuxy wrote: »

Where has Brenton gone?

Someone who uses the name of a murderer to sign up and post exclusively in a thread about a murdered teenager probably wasn't going to last long.

Eric Cartman

Fakediamond wrote: »

If the house was a known teenage haunt, how come it wasn’t teenagers who found Ana first? Do you think the local teens already knew what had happened and where she was and were therefore avoiding the house during the searches?

this happened on a monday, the older teens likely hanging out there to smoke / drink etc.. would most likely only attend at weekends. By the time the weekend rolled round there was a lot of garda presence and the last thing a 15 year old with a 10er of hash in their pocket wants is a gard looking around. Id imagine Boy A knew this in planning but obviously thats speculation.

ziedth

I think a worrying part of this (and something I personally never even realised) us how widely reported it has been the Boy B essentially would have walked (or at least been charged with a lesser crime) if he had just kept his mouth shut from Day 1.

I read a very detailed article about the garda interview methods etc and how damning it was that he kept changing his story

Makes me wonder when the next murder comes are they going to try this tactic and take something like a tactic of "No, I refuse to answer, you prove I was involved anything from now will be answered no comment"

hawkelady

Caledonia wrote: »

I think it’s probable Boy B didn’t know murder was planned. I don’t think the verdict for him is right.

Bull**** of the highest order

tayto lover

ziedth wrote: »

I think a worrying part of this (and something I personally never even realised) us how widely reported it has been the Boy B essentially would have walked (or at least been charged with a lesser crime) if he had just kept his mouth shut from Day 1.

I read a very detailed article about the garda interview methods etc and how damning it was that he kept changing his story

Makes me wonder when the next murder comes are they going to try this tactic and take something like a tactic of "No, I refuse to answer, you prove I was involved anything from now will be answered no comment"

That already happens with gangland and dissident prisoners.
I’ve read of it plenty of times.
Nothing new at all.

tuxy

Yes I believe it's the advise a solicitor will give to most people in such cases. We don't know why exactly Boy B did talk so much.

briany

ziedth wrote: »

I think a worrying part of this (and something I personally never even realised) us how widely reported it has been the Boy B essentially would have walked (or at least been charged with a lesser crime) if he had just kept his mouth shut from Day 1.

I read a very detailed article about the garda interview methods etc and how damning it was that he kept changing his story

Makes me wonder when the next murder comes are they going to try this tactic and take something like a tactic of "No, I refuse to answer, you prove I was involved anything from now will be answered no comment"

Luckily, Boy B went to pieces fairly rapidly in the interrogation process and told the Gards what they wanted to hear, and I expect that most 13 year old boys from a comfortable suburban background would do the same, being unused as they are to undergoing police interrogation.

But I'm not sure how clear it is that Boy B would have walked or escaped a heavy sentence if he'd clammed up. Since the Gards knew he was involved with bringing Ana to Boy A, I'd imagine they'd have put him under much greater scrutiny via forensics, i.e. footprints, fingerprints, dna, hairs, clothing fibres etc. There are three choices for a defendant in a case such as this, cooperate, clam up, or lie, in order of least risky to riskiest. Boy B chose 3, and got the worst of both worlds out of it. Not that anyone's particularly sorry for him about that.

In any case, Boy B was f***ed by the time he was arrested. Even if he had gotten off the charge, how's he going to go back to normal life in Lucan where he'd still be heavily suspected to have been involved? How would he face his friends, his teachers, Ana's parents and all those about town whispering? He and his family would have had to move away at the very least, and no matter where he went, he would still have had to deal with the trauma of what happened and the guilt of his involvement.

FFred

I think this thread has run it’s course.

The fact remains that an innocent and vulnerable young lady was led under false pretenses to a filthy and lonely place, and then slaughtered and butchered like an animal whilst fighting for her life.

Shame on any posters here trying to point-score against other anonymous internet people to make themselves feel better.

Shame on you.

gozunda

briany wrote: »

Luckily, Boy B went to pieces fairly rapidly in the interrogation process and told the Gards what they wanted to hear, and I expect that most 13 year old boys from a comfortable suburban background would do the same, being unused as they are to undergoing police interrogation.

But I'm not sure how clear it is that Boy B would have walked or escaped a heavy sentence if he'd clammed up. Since the Gards knew he was involved with bringing Ana to Boy A, I'd imagine they'd have put him under much greater scrutiny via forensics, i.e. footprints, fingerprints, dna, hairs, clothing fibres etc. There are three choices for a defendant in a case such as this, cooperate, clam up, or lie, in order of least risky to riskiest. Boy B chose 3, and got the worst of both worlds out of it. Not that anyone's particularly sorry for him about that.

In any case, Boy B was f***ed by the time he was arrested. Even if he had gotten off the charge, how's he going to go back to normal life in Lucan where he'd still be heavily suspected to have been involved? How would he face his friends, his teachers, Ana's parents and all those about town whispering? He and his family would have had to move away at the very least, and no matter where he went, he would still have had to deal with the trauma of what happened and the guilt of his involvement.

That's the thing - boy B didnt go to pieces whilst being interviewed by Gardai. There are some transcripts of the interviews in the media - and from the ones I saw / listened to he was like the whole thing didnt really bother him tbh.

He also continued to describe Ana in derogatory terms. No apparent remorse either for luring Ana from her house to 'hand' her over to Boy A or her death. Whatever this kid is - 'innocent' is not a word I'd use to describe him.

It was noted by the Gardai that he was calm and collected. He only changed his story when presented with evidence such as CCTV footage that showed what he was saying was not true.

gozunda

mrjoneill wrote: »

What I understand age verification is being done on credit cards. I believe kids r stealing their parents credit cards to get a verification number and they get around it. Also anonymous credit cards can be got by depositing monies in them which will get through the verification system. Once a kid has porn downloaded its available for all their friends. Unfortunately there is not an easy solution. It was reported on RTE recently the SOR program primary school kids sharing porn & charging €2 to kids without smartphones to view.

From the article and elsewhere - the process will require multiple stage ID using passport, photo taken by phone etc or a 'pass' bought st a shop where age identification will be required.

I reckon they'd already figured out that just credit card verification was non runner tbh.

briany

gozunda wrote: »

That's the thing - boy B didnt go to pieces whilst being interviewed by Gardai. There are some transcripts of the interviews in the media - and from the ones I saw / listened to he was like the whole thing didnt really bother him tbh.

He also continued to describe Ana in derogatory terms. No apparent remorse either for luring Ana from her house to 'hand' her over to Boy A or her death. Whatever this kid is - 'innocent' is not a word I'd use to describe him.

It was noted by the Gardai that he was calm and collected. He only changed his story when presented with evidence such as CCTV footage that showed what he was saying was not true.

That's what I mean by going to pieces. Once it became apparent to him that the Gardaí had evidence to counter his lies, he began telling them what they wanted to hear. The Gardaí didn't have too hard a time unravelling a 13 year old boy's lies, and being 13 years old, his naivete was plain in thinking (or hoping) there'd be no evidence the Gards would have collected to place him at the scene, or to implicate him as an accomplice.

tuxy

gozunda wrote: »

From the article and elsewhere - the process will require multiple stage ID using passport, photo taken by phone etc or a 'pass' bought st a shop where age identification will be required.

I reckon they'd already figured out that just credit card verification was non runner tbh.

I believe €10 on a debit card will get you a VPN to bypass that. Unless they start filtering VPNs also but that could cause privacy issues.
Tor is another option and doesn't cost a cent but is very slow.

Kidchameleon

FFred wrote: »

I think this thread has run it’s course.

The fact remains that an innocent and vulnerable young lady was led under false pretenses to a filthy and lonely place, and then slaughtered and butchered like an animal whilst fighting for her life.

Shame on any posters here trying to point-score against other anonymous internet people to make themselves feel better.

Shame on you.

How ironic that you criticize point scoring of some posters whilst engaging in point scoring yourself in this very post.

tuxy

Wendy Mac Maolain wrote: »

Out of curiosity could Glenwood House be demolished and have social housing built there?

The building is listed, the company that owns it is responsible for keeping the structures maintenance to a reasonable level something it appears they have failed to do.

gozunda

tuxy wrote: »

I believe €10 on a debit card will get you a VPN to bypass that. Unless they start filtering VPNs also but that could cause privacy issues.
Tor is another option and doesn't cost a cent but is very slow.

Afaik submission of photo ID will be required. Some said its similar to the way online bank accounts are verified. The article linked previously details about the photo ID. I'd expect usual gdpr rules would apply. It will he interesting to see how this works in the UK.

Reati

tuxy wrote: »

Yes I believe it's the advise a solicitor will give to most people in such cases. We don't know why exactly Boy B did talk so much.

He was 13 and thought he was more clever than the Gardaí interviewing him? Everyone been saying how supposedly smart he was... maybe he believed it.

FFred

Don’t feed the trolls.

tuxy

gozunda wrote: »

Afaik submission of photo ID will be required.

Submission of photo ID required for use of a VPN?
If that's not the case it's just like having the use of internet in any country of your choice once you log into a VPN.
I'm not sure how they could filter all VPNs they can change IP address frequently.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

That wasnt in the IT article, was it?

It's not in the really long IT article. I can't find it anywhere actually. A link would be great. Pretty important piece of information.