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

Kidchameleon

splinter65 wrote: »

Boy bs father already nailed his colors to the mast with his obnoxious outburst in court. The judge will be keen to see how deep that vein of lack of any conscience goes....

Excuse me, what? So the man has an outburst at a time of stress you will never understand and you equate that to a lack of conscience? Do you think he is the only person who has ever done that in court?

Vicarious Function

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t expect the sentencing to go ahead on the 15. The judge expressed interest in interviewing the parents of the two boys.
He’ll get a feeling about their background from that which will help him to make appropriate deductions.

Far as I understand, splinter65m, it's not a question of the Judge "interviewing the Parents". By now you will have seen the link suplied by Suckit:

Suckit wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/parents-of-the-two-boys-found-guilty-of-ana-kriegel-murder-likely-to-be-interviewed-by-courtappointed-clinicians-ahead-of-sentencing-38269554.html

Apparently it will be qualified clinicians, who will do the interviewing and send in resulting reports. So that will ensure distance between the Judge and the Parents, in case anybody, at a later date, could accuse him of being influenced in some way by them on a personal basis, and thus influencing the sentencing of the two boys. Just my understanding of it!

splinter65

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Excuse me, what? So the man has an outburst at a time of stress you will never understand and you equate that to a lack of conscience? Do you think he is the only person who has ever done that in court?

Outburst was Totally inappropriate and uncalled for and would have been duly noted by the judge and I fully expect that it prompted his desire to have the parents grilled by qualified professionals.
Boy b comes from a family where even when his father heard with his own ears and saw with his own eyes the appalling lies and lack of any kind of respect or remorse from his own son, for his part in the depraved murder of a young girl, he still chose to blame the Gardai the prosecution the judge and the jury, for having the brass neck to find his Sonny Jim guilty.
No remorse for the actions of his own child, no grief that he’d raised a monster, no dignity nothing.
Total denial.
The judge will read a report detailing all this and hopefully he will keep boy b as far away from civilization for as long as need be for him to be decontaminated of the total lack of any morals conferred on him by his awful father.

splinter65

Vicarious Function wrote: »

Far as I understand, splinter65m, it's not a question of the Judge "interviewing the Parents". By now you will have seen the link suplied by Suckit:



Apparently it will be qualified clinicians, who will do the interviewing and send in resulting reports. So that will ensure distance between the Judge and the Parents, in case anybody, at a later date, could accuse him of being influenced in some way by them on a personal basis, and thus influencing the sentencing of the two boys. Just my understanding of it!

Yes thanks I saw this earlier. It’s very satisfactory.

Faugheen

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Excuse me, what? So the man has an outburst at a time of stress you will never understand and you equate that to a lack of conscience? Do you think he is the only person who has ever done that in court?

Anything you say in open court is noted. His comments are on the public record and were directed at the judicial system.

I understand he might be upset, but he saw everything his son did and he still had a pop at the Gardai while they were comforting two people whose daughter was brutally killed.

Your insistence to argue against anything in this case is baffling, to be perfectly honest. It's almost like you believe that Boy B didn't do it.

splinter65

Faugheen wrote: »

Anything you say in open court is noted. His comments are on the public record and were directed at the judicial system.

I understand he might be upset, but he saw everything his son did and he still had a pop at the Gardai while they were comforting two people whose daughter was brutally killed.

Your insistence to argue against anything in this case is baffling, to be perfectly honest. It's almost like you believe that Boy B didn't do it.

I think everyone here believes that both boys are guilty, maybe that boy a is more guilty then boy b.
But one poster has
1. blamed Ana’s father for her death in letting her out alone with a caller identified by her brother early on a sunny evening in May.
2. Cast aspersions on the validity of Ana’s relationship with her parents based, I think, on the concept that she was adopted.
3. Defended boy bs fathers outburst in court robustly totally disregarding Ana’s parents feelings.
4. Held boy bs father up quite emotionally as a perfect example of fatherhood, a man more deserving of our sympathy then the dead girls family.
5. The Kriegel family including Ana are somehow inferior I think because both Ana and her father are not native Irish and Ana was not their natural child. Boy b is the biological child of his father so we must give his feelings and attachment to his child more credit.
6. Any reference to Ana’s beauty is apparently “disturbing”. Inference is that it’s evidence of paedophilia.
Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Collie D

I wouldn’t fuel that particular poster any further. Don’t quote him, don’t react to him and ignore him if he quotes you.

Not sure what their game is but best ignored.

iamwhoiam

Collie D wrote: »

I wouldn’t fuel that particular poster any further. Don’t quote him, don’t react to him and ignore him if he quotes you.

Not sure what their game is but best ignored.

Agreed .

splinter65

Collie D wrote: »

I wouldn’t fuel that particular poster any further. Don’t quote him, don’t react to him and ignore him if he quotes you.

Not sure what their game is but best ignored.

Hard to ignore. I detect not very far below the thin veneer of outrage clear undertones of deep misogyny, jingoism and xenophobia.
What’s great is that so many people are genuinely outraged by the depravity of this crime that this attitude stands out like a direct thumb.

up for anything

splinter65 wrote: »

no grief that he’d raised a monster

Harsh! Not many people set out to raise monsters... even monsters themselves. If there's one thing any parent knows is that when it comes down to it your children are separate and independent beings and that while you hope that everything you tried to instill in them guides and leads them there can be many many times it doesn't.

splinter65

up for anything wrote: »

Harsh! Not many people set out to raise monsters... even monsters themselves. If there's one thing any parent knows is that when it comes down to it your children are separate and independent beings and that while you hope that everything you tried to instill in them guides and leads them there can be many many times it doesn't.

Maybe I phrased it badly. Should’ve said that he showed no grief that the child he’d reared had turned out to be a monster. Didn’t intend it to be harsh, just factual imo.

volchitsa

up for anything wrote: »

Harsh! Not many people set out to raise monsters... even monsters themselves. If there's one thing any parent knows is that when it comes down to it your children are separate and independent beings and that while you hope that everything you tried to instill in them guides and leads them there can be many many times it doesn't.

There's a difference in blaming someone for their children's actions (that would be harsh without real evidence) and the parent themselves feeling/expressing grief about their child's actions. Being open to the possibility that his actions might have been even partly responsible for his son becoming a murderer is not only natural, it would actually tend to show that they are responsible, caring parents. Because they are automatically taking responsibility for what happened, even when it may not be their fault.

What people are finding hard to understand here is the father's apparent anger at the court system and not at his son, never mind any doubts about his own parenting.

Kidchameleon

splinter65 wrote: »

Outburst was Totally inappropriate and uncalled for and would have been duly noted by the judge and I fully expect that it prompted his desire to have the parents grilled by qualified professionals.
Boy b comes from a family where even when his father heard with his own ears and saw with his own eyes the appalling lies and lack of any kind of respect or remorse from his own son, for his part in the depraved murder of a young girl, he still chose to blame the Gardai the prosecution the judge and the jury, for having the brass neck to find his Sonny Jim guilty.
No remorse for the actions of his own child, no grief that he’d raised a monster, no dignity nothing.
Total denial.
The judge will read a report detailing all this and hopefully he will keep boy b as far away from civilization for as long as need be for him to be decontaminated of the total lack of any morals conferred on him by his awful father.

If you were correct, A's parents would not be included in the process. So you are wrong.

splinter65

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If you were correct, A's parents would not be included in the process. So you are wrong.

There’s no doubt in my mind that the outrageous outburst from the father of boy b in part prompted the judge to seek reports on clinical interviews with both sets of parents.
The nature of the outburst was very telling, first of all the loud denial of what was obvious to anyone who could see and hear (“an innocent boy”), the attack on the Gardai the prosecution team and the jury, (“you bunch of scumbags”) all of whom had done an impeccable and faultless job ( as agreed by the defense team who had no complaints to make) and gave an insight to all but yourself about the nature of the man. The total contempt in that moment for the family of the child his son murdered.
It was a clear as a bell then that clinically anslysed interviews with both sets of parents would go along way to informing the judge as to appropriate sentencing.

Hannibal_Smith

And back on the roundabout we go.

avalidusername

Regarding the judge looking for clinician interviews with the parents, taking into account Boy B's fathers outburst in court, I'm of the opinion that the judge could have taken that into account and is looking for professional advice as to whether the actions of the boys could be attributed to nature or nurture.
Is he just an evil little f*cker, or psychologically a good kid who has been brought up terribly.

This would definitely have an impact on sentencing as if he is an inherently evil little f*cker, the book should be thrown at him. If he was believed to be a psychologically sound boy with bad upbringing that has basically twisted him, then there's the possibility that through his teenage years as he matures and is away from his upbringers, he may adjust and be a functional member of society some day. Perhaps the book should be less thrown at him, and just given a fair few slaps of it.

There's reports that in the Bolger case, one of the killers has given out his true identity on 2 occasions and also been jailed 2 times over child porn, still in custody I think. Other lad hasn't come to police or press attention since that I'm aware of, in a job and has a girlfriend, functional member of society despite his despicable past. Maybe there is hope for some people despite their heinous past. Gives hope for humanity if there is.

tuxy

avalidusername wrote: »

There's reports that in the Bolger case, one of the killers has given out his true identity on 2 occasions and also been jailed 2 times over child porn, still in custody I think. Other lad hasn't come to police or press attention since that I'm aware of, in a job and has a girlfriend, functional member of society despite his despicable past. Maybe there is hope for some people despite their heinous past. Gives hope for humanity if there is.

The only problem there is it was Venables who people considered less evil and possibly led on by Thompson. Thompson was the one that was considered a born psychopath yet it is Venables that has been in trouble since his release.

avalidusername

tuxy wrote: »

The only problem there is it was Venables who people considered less evil and possibly led on by Thompson. Thompson was the one that was considered a born psychopath yet it is Venables that has been in trouble since his release.

Damn...emmm.....
Those are my thoughts, and possibly the judges too!

Kidchameleon

splinter65 wrote: »

There’s no doubt in my mind that the outrageous outburst from the father of boy b in part prompted the judge to seek reports on clinical interviews with both sets of parents.

Why would the judge seek a report on A's parents as a result of the actions of B's parent? Do you not see the flaw in your logic there? The judge is highly experienced and has seen similar outbursts many many times before. Court is a very stressful place at the best of times where emotions regularly get the better of people & I think you are reading too much into B's dads outburst (which I am sure he regrets btw).

Look, neither of us are the judge so neither of us know for sure but I am of the opinion that the report would have been ordered either way due to the unusual nature of the situation.

splinter65

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why would the judge seek a report on A's parents as a result of the actions of B's parent? Do you not see the flaw in your logic there? The judge is highly experienced and has seen similar outbursts many many times before. Court is a very stressful place at the best of times where emotions regularly get the better of people & I think you are reading too much into B's dads outburst (which I am sure he regrets btw).

Look, neither of us are the judge so neither of us know for sure but I am of the opinion that the report would have been ordered either way due to the unusual nature of the situation.

No, the judge never before presided over the trial of 2 14 year olds found guilty of murder before so he’d never have had the father of one of them shouting abuse at the Gardai while they comforted the family of the victim.
You’re deliberately and pointlessly misinterpreting my point in yet another creepy attempt to defend boy bs father.
Both boys are being sentenced, the parents of both boys are being interviewed.
If you want to open a thread to defend boy bs father then I’ll join you there.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

avalidusername wrote: »

Perhaps the book should be less thrown at him, and just given a fair few slaps of it.

What the actual fcuk are you on about? He led a child, a classmate, a girl he knew - and still during questioning described her as weird and not someone he’d be seen with - to her death, and a brutal sexual assault and showed no remorse, no guilt, and made no attempt to right any wrong.
A young girl will never experience what it’s like to graduate school, go to college, belong in a group of peers as an equal to them. She will never know first love, a loving relationship, marriage, kids. Anything you would hope and dream for your own child, he took it from her. The girl was clearly extremely troubled from extreme bullying and the last thing she saw before he took her life was the other evil bastard raping her with the mask on.

And you think he should be slapped with the book? He shouldn’t even be allowed look out the window for the rest of his life. No doubt he’ll be out in a few years and no doubt he’ll ruin another families life down the line.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Why would the judge seek a report on A's parents as a result of the actions of B's parent? Do you not see the flaw in your logic there? The judge is highly experienced and has seen similar outbursts many many times before. Court is a very stressful place at the best of times where emotions regularly get the better of people & I think you are reading too much into B's dads outburst (which I am sure he regrets btw).

Look, neither of us are the judge so neither of us know for sure but I am of the opinion that the report would have been ordered either way due to the unusual nature of the situation.

Maybe because they raised a rapist and a murdering scumbag and quite rightly should be held accountable for how their teens turn out?

corpusvile

avalidusername wrote: »

If he was believed to be a psychologically sound boy with bad upbringing that has basically twisted him, then there's the possibility that through his teenage years as he matures and is away from his upbringers, he may adjust and be a functional member of society some day. Perhaps the book should be less thrown at him, and just given a fair few slaps of it.

I would respectfully but strongly disagree with this, but that's what will probably happen anyway knowing this country. But I suspect both have strong psychopathic traits. The majority of psychopaths are actually non violent & when these two are eventually released they might never commit another violent act again. That doesn't mean they're rehabilitated though. I feel the same way about young James Bulger's killers & don't think they should have been released either despite their young ages at the time.

Some offenders forfeit any chance of release imo. The depravity of their crimes makes it too risky to release them. No chance at all should be given. Public safety should come first when it comes to such offenders & in cases like Ana's &James Bulger's we should be ultimately simply relieved they were caught at such an early age, rather than 20 years down the line with possibly more victims in their wake. Once caught such offenders of these specific crimes should never see the light of day again, hardline as that may sound. The risk is simply to great.

Vicarious Function

Last night I watched a documentary about the shooting of innocent 11-year old Rhys Jones in Liverpool (Crimes That Shook Britain). The shooter had been 16 years old at the time, but was 18 at the time of the sentencing. He was sentenced to 25 years. Altogether 10 people related to this crime were sentenced to lesser sentences. That included three of their parents, who aided and abetted in covering up and destroying evidence.

At present the shooter is detained in a prison which is nicknamed "Monster Mansion" because of the others who are detained there.

Do we need a "Monster Mansion" in this country to detain our two Monsters?

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/rhys-jones-killer-what-happened-12942018

Updates re the sentences of the Liverpool "Gang"

Kidchameleon

Camila Hallowed Apple wrote: »

Maybe because they raised a rapist and a murdering scumbag and quite rightly should be held accountable for how their teens turn out?

Yes thats fine & for the most part I agree with you. My point was that it was not because of B's fathers outburst that they are being assessed.

Kidchameleon

splinter65 wrote: »

No, the judge never before presided over the trial of 2 14 year olds found guilty of murder before

Nobody said he did

splinter65 wrote: »

so he’d never have had the father of one of them shouting abuse at the Gardai while they comforted the family of the victim.

I was merely pointing out the flaw in your argument that all of the parents were being assessed as a result of B's fathers outburst, an error you are not succeeding in squirming your way out of...

splinter65 wrote: »

You’re deliberately and pointlessly misinterpreting my point in yet another creepy attempt to defend boy bs father.

Whats wrong with defending an innocent man? And I am not the one who is misrepresenting anybody, that is you...

splinter65 wrote: »

Both boys are being sentenced, the parents of both boys are being interviewed.
If you want to open a thread to defend boy bs father then I’ll join you there.

splinter65 wrote: »

There’s no doubt in my mind that the outrageous outburst from the father of boy b in part prompted the judge to seek reports on clinical interviews with both sets of parents.

Hannibal_Smith

Some one posted further up the thread, a report from the Independent which says the Judge ordered Psychiatric Reports on the boys.

The forensic psychologist sought direction and made suggestions on how to prepare the report. It said

Mr Grehan said Prof Kennedy had made a number of suggestions in his letter, including that the boys be assessed by a clinical psychologist with appropriate child and adolescent experience, and that the boys' parents be interviewed.

So it was the professor's suggestion that the boys parents be interviewed.

McCrack

Well yes, if professional reports are being prepared for children it would be normal to interview the parents and siblings too

Sawduck

Wait are people actually trying to defend you little murders/rapists, seriously come on people we all know these two disgusting rodents deserve the death penalty

Yurt2

Sawduck wrote: »

Wait are people actually trying to defend you little murders/rapists, seriously come on people we all know these two disgusting rodents deserve the death penalty

Strong post. Edgy. 8/10