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

sbsquarepants

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's either that or he's just gotten vetted and reckons it's a good pick up line!:D.

Howaya doin'. I've a job with the civil service, a bit of road frontage land and I'm fully Garda vetted. Are we on?

martingriff

tuxy wrote: »

Only men can commit violent and sexual crimes.

Of course how silly of me

tuxy

sbsquarepants wrote: »

But i think the way it should work is that society at large should be prioritised over the rights of criminals. I personally feel that it's way more important that innocent people be protected from sickos than sickos be protected from retribution.

Society will be prioritised, I could be wrong but I don't think boy A will be released unless a psychological report deems him low risk after review. Of course psychologists are just as prone to mistakes as anyone else and that is worrying. But some people do commit such crimes once and then never a again, contant vigilante attacks on someone could be something that is more harmful to the community than not naming them.

Gadgetman496

Boy 'B' to appeal his conviction.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/boy-b-now-expected-to-appeal-his-conviction-for-murder-38665932.html

martingriff

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's either that or he's just gotten vetted and reckons it's a good pick up line!:D

All joking aside i reckon that's why anonymity is a bad idea though. The state shouldn't be facilitating scumbags like this in pulling the wool over innocent peoples eyes. It's morally wrong by any metric i can think of.

Do you think by the naming of these 2 it will make everything okay and people wont have to be careful. You should alway be diligent but not pre judge people

martingriff

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm not the one with the problem.

I'm giving those who have a problem an easy solution.

Your not though as just because they pass a vetting means nothing just means they have not been caught

tupenny

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

Boy 'B' to appeal his conviction.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/boy-b-now-expected-to-appeal-his-conviction-for-murder-38665932.html

Not surprised.
Scum

Gadgetman496

tupenny wrote: »

Not surprised. Admit

Going on the slating the judge gave him, referring to his high IQ & deviousness in attempting to cover up & his total lack of remorse, he has to have no chance.

AndrewJRenko

martingriff wrote: »

Your not though as just because they pass a vetting means nothing just means they have not been caught

It means that they're not Boy A or Boy B, which is the problem that a number of posters said needs to be solved.

tuxy

tupenny wrote: »

Not surprised. Admit

Was it the boys family or the solicitor that said they didn't accept the verdict when it was announced? So unfortunately there was always a high chance of this.

Some of the juries decision was based on interpretation and not hard facts. The jury made the right call but boy B has nothing to lose by attempting an appeal.

martingriff

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It means that they're not Boy A or Boy B, which is the problem that a number of posters said needs to be solved.

Ya because there the only 2 in Ireland we have to worry about

Bigbagofcans

abff wrote: »

This may lead them to look at emigrating post release, although their options in this regard may be somewhat limited with a murder conviction hanging over them.

That didn't stop Wayne O'Donoghue making a great life for himself in the UK, working for an architectural firm.

Sickening that O'Donoghue let Robert's family go on an eight-day search, knowing that their son was already dead.

Gadgetman496

tuxy wrote: »

Was it the boys family or the solicitor that said they didn't accept the verdict when it was announced? So unfortunately there was always a high chance of this.

Some of the juries decision was based on interpretation and not hard facts. The jury made the right call but boy B has nothing to lose by attempting an appeal.

I don't know about that!

The judge clearly stated yesterday when he addressed them directly that they had a lot of work to do to show they accepted what they had done in order to have any chance when they eventually face the review board.

tuxy

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

I don't know about that!

The judge clearly stated yesterday when he addressed them directly that they had a lot of work to do to show they accepted what they had done in order to have any chance when they eventually face the review board.

You're right but I don't think you can appeal just for the sake of appealing. His solicitor must have something in mind where he believes something was done incorrectly. I wonder on what grounds the appeal will be made.

sbsquarepants

martingriff wrote: »

Do you think by the naming of these 2 it will make everything okay and people wont have to be careful. You should alway be diligent but not pre judge people

No of course not. But if you are aware that someones new neighbour / boyfriend / in law / employee or whatever is a convicted rapist + murderer, but you choose not to tell them because your concerned about said rapist / murderer and that situation ends in tears (which it most likely will) - well then you bear some of the blame in my eyes.

That's the very stance the state is taking by maintaining anonymity for scum like this. Fúck the consequences for those 2 little bastards, they deserve everything they get and worse.

AndrewJRenko

martingriff wrote: »

Ya because there the only 2 in Ireland we have to worry about

The problem stated on this thread was making sure that their daughter doesn't end up dating one of these boys in the future, so I presented a reasonable solution for this.

If you have a different problem that needs solving, maybe you'd like to clarify what the problem is - though it may be a little off topic for this thread.

Letwin_Larry

tuxy wrote: »

If you were the judge what sentence would you give that would limit a successful appeal?
Take into consideration how horrific an appeal process could be for the Kriegel's and the fact it risks them serving even less time than the actual sentence that was given.

well if what you say is true, then we must conclude that the sentencing laws in this country are a joke, and as most people suspect favour the criminals , the rapists, the sex offenders, the murderers over their INNOCENT VICTIMS.

they need to be changed ASAP.

Gadgetman496

tuxy wrote: »

You're right but I don't think you can appeal just for the sake of appealing. His solicitor must have something in mind where he believes something was done incorrectly. I wonder on what grounds the appeal will be made.

For sure, that is the case, you can't just appeal for the sake of appealing, you must satisfy a judge that you have solid grounds for the appeal before it ever gets allowed.

I suppose where I'm coming from is this, if he attempts an appeal but it gets rejected, or, he is allowed to appeal & it fails, it will copper-fasten the fact that he does not accept what he done, that won't bode well with the review board.

splinter65

I don’t think a lot of people can grasp the whole picture here.
I can’t anyway.
This is now a society where humans don’t have any value or worth just by dint of being humans.
In order to have a worth now you have to have the mass approval of your peers.
Ana didn’t meet the criteria by any stretch of the imagination so had no worth to them beyond being an ideal candidate to star in their own real life rape/murder fantasy adventure.

Gadgetman496

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t think a lot of people can grasp the whole picture here.
I can’t anyway.
This is now a society where humans don’t have any value or worth just by dint of being humans.
In order to have a worth now you have to have the mass approval of your peers.
Ana didn’t meet the criteria by any stretch of the imagination so had no worth to them beyond being an ideal candidate to star in their own real life rape/murder fantasy adventure.

Ana was worth millions more than them. A fact they miscalculated badly.

tuxy

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t think a lot of people can grasp the whole picture here.
I can’t anyway.
This is now a society where humans don’t have any value or worth just by dint of being humans.
In order to have a worth now you have to have the mass approval of your peers.
Ana didn’t meet the criteria by any stretch of the imagination so had no worth to them beyond being an ideal candidate to star in their own real life rape/murder fantasy adventure.

That's the way it's been in many secondary schools for a very long time. I can confirm it was like that back in the 90s.
The horrific murder is a different issue even if the selection of the victim was based on the first issue.

Letwin_Larry

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t think a lot of people can grasp the whole picture here.
I can’t anyway.
This is now a society where humans don’t have any value or worth just by dint of being humans.
In order to have a worth now you have to have the mass approval of your peers.
Ana didn’t meet the criteria by any stretch of the imagination so had no worth to them beyond being an ideal candidate to star in their own real life rape/murder fantasy adventure.

these 2 freaks are predators, and like all predators they will seek out the weak and/or the isolated to prey on.
i fear if it had not been Ana, then in time they would have fixated on some other unsuspecting poor soul.
old, young, male, female, it would make little difference to these 2 scrotes so long as they could vent their sick twisted desires.

iamwhoiam

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t think a lot of people can grasp the whole picture here.
I can’t anyway.
This is now a society where humans don’t have any value or worth just by dint of being humans.
In order to have a worth now you have to have the mass approval of your peers.
Ana didn’t meet the criteria by any stretch of the imagination so had no worth to them beyond being an ideal candidate to star in their own real life rape/murder fantasy adventure.

Why are you tarring all society with the same brush as these boys ? The vast majority of society does not think like that ? I deal with teens who certainely cannot be associated or tarred with the same brush as these murdering thugs

martingriff

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The problem stated on this thread was making sure that their daughter doesn't end up dating one of these boys in the future, so I presented a reasonable solution for this.

If you have a different problem that needs solving, maybe you'd like to clarify what the problem is - though it may be a little off topic for this thread.

My problem and maybe this specific thread might not be best to bring it up is these 2 (I agree should be name) are not the only threats out there and rather then focusing on these 2 people should concentrate on what is in front of them and be diligent that way. Also when these 2 get released if ever they will have changed appearance wise so all you have is a name. So will you swear off John's or Sean's forever.

martingriff

sbsquarepants wrote: »

No of course not. But if you are aware that someones new neighbour / boyfriend / in law / employee or whatever is a convicted rapist + murderer, but you choose not to tell them because your concerned about said rapist / murderer and that situation ends in tears (which it most likely will) - well then you bear some of the blame in my eyes.

That's the very stance the state is taking by maintaining anonymity for scum like this. Fúck the consequences for those 2 little bastards, they deserve everything they get and worse.

Who chooses not to tell. Should there be a list online of every criminal so we can see.

I agree with your last paragraph

Gadgetman496

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

For sure, that is the case, you can't just appeal for the sake of appealing, you must satisfy a judge that you have solid grounds for the appeal before it ever gets allowed.

I suppose where I'm coming from is this, if he attempts an appeal but it gets rejected, or, he is allowed to appeal & it fails, it will copper-fasten the fact that he does not accept what he done, that won't bode well with the review board.

Boy B has a lot of extra information he can bring out for an appeal. He can tell a story of just going along with the scheme and then being too scared to tell his family and the police about it. As he wasn't the one who assaulted or murdered Ana, it's not unreasonable that his murder conviction might be overturned. I would say he (or more accurately, his lawyers) can deflect all blame onto Boy A if B is seen to be cooperating and credible.

sbsquarepants

martingriff wrote: »

Who chooses not to tell.

The state is choosing not to tell, by granting them anonymity. Therefore should they re-offend the state will be complicit as far as i'm concerned. For A, ever letting them out and B, helping them conceal their pasts

The usual argument for anonymity is to protect the victim, say in a rape case where the victim doesn't want to be identified by association - and that's fine to a degree although i do think it endangers others, but to spare any more suffering by the victim that's a reasonable payoff.

Anna can't be spared anything so that's not an argument, i don't believe the 2 pieces of shít who killed her should be spared anything.

Gadgetman496

Deleted User wrote: »

Boy B has a lot of extra information he can bring out for an appeal. He can tell a story of just going along with the scheme and then being too scared to tell his family and the police about it. As he wasn't the one who assaulted or murdered Ana, it's not unreasonable that his murder conviction might be overturned. I would say he (or more accurately, his lawyers) can deflect all blame onto Boy A if B is seen to be cooperating and credible.

The only known credible fact regarding Boy 'B' is that he led Ana to her death.

Everything else he contributed afterwards was laced with lies and deceit & given his high IQ referred to by the judge, was done knowingly by Boy 'B' in order to be self serving.

Gadgetman496

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

The only known credible fact regarding Boy 'B' is that he led Anna to her death.

Everything else he contributed afterwards was laced with lies and deceit & given his high IQ referred to by the judge, was done knowingly by Boy 'B' in order to be self serving.

All true. But now he can claim he is ready and mature enough to tell the whole truth, therefore bringing new evidence, thus giving him grounds for appeal.

omega man

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

Going on the slating the judge gave him, referring to his high IQ & deviousness in attempting to cover up & his total lack of remorse, he has to have no chance.

Nothing would surprise me with our justice system. Further torment for poor Anna’s family now.