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

Lefty Bicek

tuxy wrote: »

What's stopping you? I doubt security in Oberstown is sufficient to stop someone who is that determined.

I think the other poster may be referring to a situation in which provision is made in the system for execution as a punishment for a capital crime.

Not everyone would have the intestinal fortitude for that. No doubt some do, even though our society at large does not.

I don't think anyone is sensibly going to jeopardise their own liberty, as such.

Just offering that as a more sensible alternative to your assumption.

As for other people's references to North Korea... very tiresome.

Nameless_2019

skallywag wrote: »

I really hate folk who make an alt just to make a comment that they are afraid to under their regular username.

This is not an alt. I've read comments on these boards for a long time but I was moved to register a username to make that point.

NewClareman

scudzilla wrote: »

It's in cases like this i would have no hesitation with the death sentence, an irrefutable open and shut case.

Hand on heart i would have no questions at all on pulling the trigger on Animal A

And what would you propose for all those other people who stood by while Ana was bullied and her life made a misery?

Hal3000

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I may be wrong but I think an attempt in the UK to do this has collapsed. You are right when you say phones are everywhere with kids; you are right when you point to a collective failure of parenting in this regard. I think this is a rare moment brought about by the death of one of the most innocent children when there is a need for someone to begin. Strange and probably my age but I think Gay Byrne would have had it on the air and started something. I hope someone does.

The UK are still pressing ahead with it. We need new leaders here. Leaders who will focus on protecting children from extreme content, leaders who will make schools and principals accountable for bullying instead of letting schools say excuses like “ sorry our hands are tied and we can’t do anything “. We need leaders to sentence crimes especially against children harshly, we need leaders to stop letting people who view child abuse material walk away with suspended sentences, we need leaders who will address anti social behavior and have work programs for kids who engage in such. The youth today don’t know discipline and it’s clear they are now becoming more problematic than before. It time we as a country got our hands around these issues and stop sweeping them under the carpet by saying it rarely happens here etc etc.

RandomName2

Hal3000 wrote: »

Until our government act and totally ban porn access for under 18 what is really going to change ? Most parents have phones in the hands of 7 years old now. It’s just easier for them to raise their kids this way. A great quote earlier in a paper I read “ it’s like giving kids full access to red light zones in cities “ . Government need to act on this quickly. Parents will always cave and give the kids phones. It’s everywhere just look around. I saw two kids no older than 6 with phones while walking in the park with their parents. That’s just pathetic parenting in my view. Things are going on only get worse unless this problem is addressed.

Yes it was definitely access to pornography which caused Boy A and Boy B to murder a classmate. :pac:

Not the violent computer games this time, not the heavy metal, not the desensetization to violence witnessed on tv, but pornography. It is also definitely not the case that they would have been that way inclined without pornography. You could say that they were driven over the edge by pornography.

Their defense should have pleaded reduced responsibility owing to the influence of pornography on them.:rolleyes:

Do you remember how before the 90s and online pornography was a thing, how murder didn't exist? As such having government oversight of what everyone looks at online, and what technologies people can own, clearly follows as a natural response to this case.

NewClareman

Deleted User wrote: »

when a vanishingly small percentage of people react to porn or video games or tv in this fashion, it really doesnt work to focus on these things.

its come up again and again.

rock music did not kill those kids

How do you know that only a vanishingly small number react badly. Many forms of violence, including sexual assault are at high levels.

Focusing on “those things” is exactly what’s required.

take everything

I wonder what B will appeal it on.

I find it hard to see why he would lie to the police so much if he thinks he's innocent of this crime.
People who are innocent cooperate with the police.

Also, never did I hear either of them express anything nice about Ana or her death, apart from derogatory comments.

Beasty

splinter65 wrote: »

You’ve no interest in backing up your claim that I generalised . Fine.

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Splinter, the fact that you're ignoring all the posts that have quoted your generalisations back to you speaks for itself. Now get back to all those posters, because it's just poor form bickering in this thread.

The pair of you were bickering. If you don't give it a rest you will be, at a minimum, banned from posting in this thread again

Hal3000

RandomName2 wrote: »

Yes it was definitely access to pornography which caused Boy A and Boy B to murder a classmate. :pac:

Not the violent computer games this time, not the heavy metal, not the desensetization to violence witnessed on tv, but pornography. It is also definitely not the case that they would have been that way inclined without pornography. You could say that they were driven over the edge by pornography.

Their defense should have pleaded reduced responsibility owing to the influence of pornography on them.:rolleyes:

Do you remember how before the 90s and online pornography was a thing, how murder didn't exist? As such having government oversight of what everyone looks at online, and what technologies people can own, clearly follows as a natural response to this case.

Sorry to disappoint you, but pornography on tap is effecting the sexual encounters of young teens. If you asked any young teen if they’ve been sent or seen explicit material within the last 24 hours the answer will almost always be yes. If you think daily access to graphic material at a young age is not harmful ? And I do remember the 90s. I also remember not having the ability to chose whatever form or category of porn I wanted in the click of a button.,

take everything

tuxy wrote: »

What's stopping you? I doubt security in Oberstown is sufficient to stop someone who is that determined.

I think he means if capital punishment was legal.
At least I hope that's what he means. :pac:

tuxy

take everything wrote: »

I think he means if capital punishment was legal.
At least I hope that's what he means. :pac:

I don't think the issue with capital punishment has ever been to find an executioner.

scudzilla

tuxy wrote: »

What's stopping you? I doubt security in Oberstown is sufficient to stop someone who is that determined.

take everything wrote: »

I think he means if capital punishment was legal.
At least I hope that's what he means. :pac:

Thats exactly what i meant, if it was legal. Hardly going to risk my own freedom for an animal am i?

mrjoneill

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Thanks for that.

Just to say Boy B didn't receive a sentence for the sexual attack. He's also never said what happened. Does that suggest he's still in fear of Boy A?

Don't think so. I have seen a few cases overseas of similar of the alpha male & their less dominant invol in crime. The less dominant life's mission is to please the alpha. In some cases that came to notice due to serious criminal activity their turned out there was a homoerotic attraction of the less dominant. Animal A was clearly the dominant & did martial arts. His father boasted to the park ranger he was more than capable of looking after himself. Why won't Animal B come clean is mysterious? He more than likely did not take part in the physical assault or sex assault yet he refuses to come clean. I put forward the theory he planned it to set up Ana for Animal A to please him & he wanted to see him in a sex act with Ana because Animal A turned him on. This would obv destroy what credibility he tries to maintain of his innocence. The investigation Gardai did notice he was smarts for his age & manipulative in how he tried to control his questioning. And he lied and he lied and he lied.

LillySV

McCrack wrote: »

Well then you should move to North Korea or somewhere

I’d prefer if you did

mrjoneill

careless sherpa wrote: »

In the year between the murder and the trial were the two boys still residing in the town? Could her parents have had to meet them out and about?

No, once arrested and charged they were in custody except for Animal A being released into his grandfathers custody over a Christmas period. Grandfather is not from the area or the county as I understand. I understand between the murder and their charging both of these Animals were free & could be seen hanging about the area they live in. Animal B had convinced his parents that he had nothing whatsoever to do with Ana's murder till the Gardai got an admission from him during questioning to his shocked mother that he was at the actual murder location.

CollyFlower

Quote: mrjoneill
. It would appear in the school canteen when Ana came to sit at her classmates table the whole class got up & left.

I don't believe this really happened, that's like something you'd see in an American film... I really hope that carry-on was going on there.

Pauliedragon

Hal3000 wrote: »

Sorry to disappoint you, but pornography on tap is effecting the sexual encounters of young teens. If you asked any young teen if they’ve been sent or seen explicit material within the last 24 hours the answer will almost always be yes. If you think daily access to graphic material at a young age is not harmful ? And I do remember the 90s. I also remember not having the ability to chose whatever form or category of porn I wanted in the click of a button.,

Whilst I never believed in this violent movie, video games ideas there might be merit in some of this info. A study was done in Oz about what they are getting up to and it's scary. A 16 year has to wear a colostomy bag for life there a session was so rough. That never happened in my days in school in the 90's and we were no prudes.
https://www.news.com.au/news/boner-garage-posts-a-window-into-the-world-of-sexualised-young-women-online/story-fnstek7z-1227379060695

tuxy

CollyFlower wrote: »

Quote: mrjoneill
. It would appear in the school canteen when Ana came to sit at her classmates table the whole class got up & left.

I don't believe this really happened, that's like something you'd see in an American film... I really hope that carry-on was going on there.

I've seen it happen in real life, in Ireland. But we don't know if it happened to Anna so should not speculate.

CollyFlower

tuxy wrote: »

I've seen it happen in real life, in Ireland. But we don't know if it happened to Anna so should not speculate.

I wasn't speculation, I was quoting what another poster said.

Flippyfloppy

tuxy wrote: »

I've seen it happen in real life, in Ireland. But we don't know if it happened to Anna so should not speculate.

Many schools don't have canteens for a start

tuxy

CollyFlower wrote: »

I wasn't speculation, I was quoting what another poster said.

What the other poster said is speculation unless they saw it with their own eyes.

Omackeral

take everything wrote: »

I wonder what B will appeal it on.

Just on this. Not sure if everyone here is aware of this but if a convicted person appeals a sentence, not only can it be reduced or left as is but it can actually be increased. It's a risky business for some people. I've seen instances of it. Obviously you'd appeal a life sentence as there's not a mark up possible on that ergo there can't be an increase.

B could be playing with fire though and maintaining innocence could be mitagating in either way.

ohnonotgmail

Omackeral wrote: »

Just on this. Not sure if everyone here is aware of this but if a convicted person appeals a sentence, not only can it be reduced or left as is but it can actually be increased. It's a risky business for some people. I've seen instances of it. Obviously you'd appeal a life sentence as there's not a mark up possible on that ergo there can't be an increase.

B could be playing with fire though and maintaining innocence could be mitagating in either way.

It is reported that Boy B is appealing his conviction not his sentence. The result will be either he is found not guilty or the original conviction and sentence is upheld. There is no scope for altering his sentence if he only appeals the conviction.

Suckit

Omackeral wrote: »

Just on this. Not sure if everyone here is aware of this but if a convicted person appeals a sentence, not only can it be reduced or left as is but it can actually be increased. It's a risky business for some people. I've seen instances of it. Obviously you'd appeal a life sentence as there's not a mark up possible on that ergo there can't be an increase.

B could be playing with fire though and maintaining innocence could be mitagating in either way.

The amount he has already put Ana's parents through, and still hasn't come clean. I believe if he wants to succesfully appeal, he will have to come up with a consistent believable story that he is able to back up somehow. If he continues to lie and not tell the truth about what actually happened, then I hope his sentence is extended by quite a lot.

Regarding the IT article that has a few psychologists not involved with the case commenting, and the one most quoted here (FBI) I don't believe Boy A was the dominant one, I think it was Boy B. I think he is more intelligent than Boy A and probably found it quite easy to manipulate him, which is what the MI5 profiler thought I believe. If he was genuinely afraid of Boy A, he has had over a year to come clean and distance himself from him. He has had a load of chances to ask for help etc. But he didn't.

ohnonotgmail

Suckit wrote: »

The amount he has already put Ana's parents through, and still hasn't come clean. I believe if he wants to succesfully appeal, he will have to come up with a consistent believable story that he is able to back up somehow. If he continues to lie and not tell the truth about what actually happened, then I hope his sentence is extended by quite a lot.

An appeal is not a retrial. It only looks at the conduct of the trial and the judge.

Suckit

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

An appeal is not a retrial. It only looks at the conduct of the trial and the judge.

It will still effect her family.
But he would still have to go over his story, no?
If not then I am mistaken. Not well versed on courts.

ohnonotgmail

Suckit wrote: »

It will still effect her family.
But he would still have to go over his story, no?
If not then I am mistaken. Not well versed on courts.

It is not a replaying of the facts of the case. To be honest i am struggling to think of any grounds he has for appeal. the conduct of the gardai and the legal people involved seemd to be impeccable.

tupenny

Eric Cartman wrote: »

im so glad this has come to light, seeing the 'boy b mastermind' theory was shocking to say the least. He was a sidekick/admirer who picked the worst person to look up to.

If you knew boy b at all you would not say that

Nameless_2019

Suckit wrote: »

Regarding the IT article that has a few psychologists not involved with the case commenting, and the one most quoted here (FBI) I don't believe Boy A was the dominant one, I think it was Boy B. I think he is more intelligent than Boy A and probably found it quite easy to manipulate him, which is what the CI5 profiler thought I believe. If he was genuinely afraid of Boy A, he has had over a year to come clean and distance himself from him. He has had a load of chances to ask for help etc. But he didn't.

I would agree on this. The view that Boy A was dominant over Boy B comes largely from Boy B's father's statements in the trial and the psychologist retained by the defense team who didn't give evidence before the jury. There were a number of other witnesses, school friends of the two boys, that gave evidence during the trial that painted a different picture of the relationship.

megatron989

tuxy wrote: »

What the other poster said is speculation unless they saw it with their own eyes.

It's not that unbelievable, I remember similar happening in my school. Children and teens can be very cruel, if you don't believe these things happen you had a better childhood than many I'd wager.
I wonder are we seeing the end result now of years of feral kids raising themselves basically. Is this a sign of how bad things can get? Not all kids go this way obviously, but I see it daily in my area with completely wild teens (13 to 15 ish) robbing, drinking in plain sight, recently a group smashed up a car in a lidl car park in broad daylight. Even if it's 5% of the younger generations, we have a problem. Personally I've no idea what the root cause is but lack of responsibility via lack of parents guidance must be a part. All imo obviously. And not suggesting these car smashing kids would go on to kill, but they've no respect for others, no ability to see the world through another's eyes, seemingly getting worse... and now this.
Some people are evil no doubt, but what I see with my own eyes makes me glad I grew up when I did, least the bullies only ignored you at lunch back then.