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

Strazdas

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Foreknowledge of the crime is required. I very much doubt that Boy B had that. He states that he thought Boy A was joking when talking about harming her. He provided materials. But did he know a murder was about to take place? And if so why go to her house and thus become the prime or only suspect?

The hours and hours of video testimony seems to have buried him. People can definitely form a distinct impression of a person watching them being questioned for eight or ten hours or whatever it was. The dozens of lies coupled with his general demeanour appears to have convinced the jury of his guilt and that this was no naive innocent who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Seathrun66

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Psychopaths rarely do.

You are way too naive to be a lawyer.

What is it like to watch a young girl die?? What do you have to have inside you to NOT break down like a baby and tell everyone?

You have to be something else. And he admitted he saw it.

You're describing a sociopath rather than a psychopath. And reaction to crime rarely goes down a predictable route.

Seathrun66

Faugheen wrote: »

See I call bullsh*t here.

Any legal professional worth their salt knows you can't base any case beit for theft of a packet of crisps or murder based on a few articles you read.

No idea what you're saying. I guess my skills don't stretch to deciphering.

Faugheen

Seathrun66 wrote: »

He may well be. He may not. Not sure how I'd react if my son was convicted of murder. Particularly if there was little evidence. Can't say I'd be composed.

'Particularly if there was little evidence'.

You're absolutely not a lawyer, or just a really bad one.

anewme

Stoner wrote: »

Exactly. I grew up knowing there were actions I'd be disowned for, or at least thought I would. It was part of a deterrent, a duty to society.

You can still stand with your child, get them help and do the right thing while recognising they did something wrong.

I suspect that some patents think only they can speak of the parent child bond. Their bond is so strong that nobody else can understand it, yet they think they can measure other people's.

It's a monumental lack of empathy masked by a narcissistic view of their own relationship with their child. Its possibly not good for the childs moral development either.

Regardless of what happened up to the murder, including any potential tampering with evidence initially. There came a point when they chose to take stand for the wrong thing, to hide behind their love, people will understand.

No amount of pulling on fellow patents' heart strings should hide that imo. It's a weakness in character, "don't judge it, it might happen to you"

I would be sick with shame if my boy did something like this, personally I'd be finished.

But

He'd still be my boy. I'd still love him. I'd have to make decisions and do what I though was right, ultimately for him too. This is the time to consider other parents, particularly the ones left with nothing, that's the heart string to pull.

But hopefully you’d not have a tantrum effing and blinding into the faces of parents whose daughter died a horrific death in which your son was culpable.

The absolute arrogance of this man is astounding.

petrolcan

Gimme A Pound wrote: »

Moving the goalposts. It was violent bullying in your last post. Now it's "something that could be construed as bullying" which "everyone" is guilty of. Firstly you don't know everyone, secondly - don't judge everyone by your standards in order to feel better. The vast majority of people never engage in violent bullying, and damn right those who do so should get done for assault.

You're right. I didn't intend to move any posts but my original reply was to 'violent bullying'.

Again, you are right, I don't know everyone. In all my years chatting with friends, colleagues and acquaintances about being a teenager, bullying has come up and every one of us admitted to it in some shape or form. The general consensus is that 'kids are sh1ts'

As to getting done for assault, see my comment above about kids.

This murder is awful, no doubt about that.

However, there are still a thousand questions to be answered. The young girl was being bullied and it was common knowledge so why wasn't something done about it? And by something done, I mean by everyone involved. Every bully, every parent of every bully. Where was the support for Ana? For Ana's parents?
What did the school actually do with the bullying reports? What about the internet companies do about the abuse?

There is a much larger discussion to be had and maybe here is not the right place to do so but we need to do something. And I mean all of us actually doing something. Don't just sit there posting to boards saying something must be done, get off your aris and write to your TD, local council, representative, whatever but do something.

tayto lover

Seathrun66 wrote: »

He may well be. He may not. Not sure how I'd react if my son was convicted of murder. Particularly if there was little evidence. Can't say I'd be composed.

****load of evidence.
He might have fooled you but the jury thankfully didn’t buy it.

Sheep breeder

lemmno wrote: »

Read a post a few pages back that a youth club worker saw a group of kids get up whenever Ana came down to sit with them. I don’t understand why so many adults just watched things like that happen? Isolation is so cruel, those kids should have been told that they make everyone feel welcome or they’re not in the youth club. End of.

They should be ashamed to say that the person witnessed this and said or didn’t report such behaviour.

STB.

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Once more, foreknowledge of the intended offence is required for conviction. And the Appeal will rule on whether that was present. The evidence implies it wasn't.

Read the reports for God sake.


Own Admissions.

tayto lover

STB. wrote: »

Read the reports for God sake.


Own Admissions.

He’s obviously just trolling.

Omackeral

First and foremost, what an awfully sad tragedy. Have seen Ana on the papers every day but tonight it hits resonated hardest. Hearing her poor Mam's comments was so harrowing and heart-breaking. Really and truly. I work in a prison and am surrounded by murderers and lifers. This is different though. As grown up and as beautiful looking as she was, this was just a child. It's filled me with sadness more than rage. Just absolutely devastating.

Not that I want to spend long talking about the creatures that did this to her but it will be noted among the other prisoners that there was a sexual assault as part of this. For that reason, their lives won't be worth living if let into general population. Not too sure how Oberstown will deal with that but I'm fairly certain word will leak through as to who these new additions are and it won't be pleasant for them... and I'm ok with that.

Bobblehats

PressRun wrote: »

Never read or listened to the details of the last moments of her life, but read a bit about who Ana was as a person. Talented and sensitive were two word that came to mind. A girl that probably would have flourished once outside the toxic school environment. But also could not escape how sad and lonely she seemed to be, and how much she craved friendship.
A conversation needs to be had about how tough it is for these kids, the relentless bullying that can turn violent, the mental anguish a lot of them seem to be going through.
What a horrible thing those boys did to a girl so full of potential and her family.

I don’t believe she was that lonely she was a cool enough chick, and would have had at least had one solid enough pal who was keen to hang out with her in fact I remember her youtube account when the news broke. There was another girl with her as far as I can recall

And someone suggesting alienation because of foreign descent well she looked and sounded irish enough to me, maybe a little russian across the eyes in a certain light but that would be pretty fecking pedantic. I’m keen to know what subculture these kids were into the devil in music was the recurring theme for most of our generation but none of us would actually think of indulging such things. I see these boys had a satanic study group what was that all about?

Seathrun66

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

And yet here we are. A murder conviction.



And therefore the jury must have accepted this too because there is a murder conviction.

You might know more than this judge, and the DPP and the legal system on this one but I doubt it.

You started off by claiming that there might be a technicality on the inadmissible evidence (and certainly that might be grounds for an appeal) and that the gardai might have interviewed coercively, something you seem to have recanted on.

Now you are claiming that the entire Irish legal system doesn’t know what constitutes murder but you do.

Huge if true. Heads should roll.

Never claimed to know more, or point that out from my posts if you'd be so gracious. I posit that the conviction may be unsafe. Thus appealable and winnable. As many case are. On a daily basis if you check the court reports.

Not allowing the doctor to give psychiatric evidence was I believe a judicial error. No justifiable reason for exclusion. That alone will ensure there's an Appeal granted. The court may weigh it up and discount it but not allowing it allows cracks in the conviction.

No recanting on the Gardai interviews. I stated that the defence team will continue to argue they were coercive. I believe they were not but more weight may be given to the argument if the psychiatric evidence is allowed.

Legal system is very clear on what constitutes murder. Some posters here less so. Him being at the scene is insufficient. And if he wasn't aware that a murder was going to take place then he is not guilty.

Faugheen

Seathrun66 wrote: »

No idea what you're saying. I guess my skills don't stretch to deciphering.

But you're basing a case on what you've read in the media.

A legal profession knows what happens in the court room isn't always portrayed as well in writing, no matter the case. You need to be in the court room to get a real indicator.

You, a supposed lawyer, are basing your thoughts from what was written down and having not set foot inside the court room.

Seathrun66

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

He will probably admit to murder in a year or so. Gut feeling.

You may be right. To be honest I'd be happy with that outcome as he'd likely explain all and that would give the parents some sense of closure.
Personally I don't believe that will happen though. And unfortunately, as other posters have said, we may never get the entire truth.

Seathrun66

Faugheen wrote: »

'Weak kid' my hole.

He orchestrated the whole thing.

Maybe he did. But the evidence doesn't imply that.

petrolcan

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Once more, foreknowledge of the intended offence is required for conviction. And the Appeal will rule on whether that was present. The evidence implies it wasn't.

Away with thee

Your logic and levelheadedness has no place here.

ILoveYourVibes

Bobblehats wrote: »

I see these boys had a satanic study group what was that all about?

The youth of Ireland seriously needs better guidance from the darkside.

Seathrun66

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

He was at least equal. Kids can 'goad' each other. Maybe he thought he could talk his way out of it.

Plus he was injured.

Boy B injured? Not in any media or court reports. And remember, no DNA link so clearly no altercation with Ana.

ILoveYourVibes

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Maybe he did. But the evidence doesn't imply that.

It does he confessed it to a psychologist and a friend.

holliehobbie

El_Bee wrote: »

Mrsmum wrote: »

Maybe this is a stupid question but is there any crime called bullying even when it's at the extreme end ? Can you go to the garda station and report that your child is being bullied by X ? Because some of these bullies would badly want a squad car to the door or to be up in court.

screamer wrote: »

You know I could tell you a bullying story that would make your hair stand in end with what the bully did, and their parents refused to let them be questioned or anything as they were under 18 and they got away with it scot free. So in short, if your kid is being bullied in school, find a new school, unless your kid is willing to kick the crap out of the bullies, there’s no other way.

As I mentioned earlier, I overheard a neghbour and her friend build an alibi for their two little angels as they were called into a meeting in the school over bullying another girl, the vile creatures are still in school, clown world.

I had to sit and make small talk with the mother of one of two little 10 year old bitches who had my daughter and her little friend who were only in junior infants and 4 years of age at the time so petrified they were hysterical going to school. Things came to a head when my daughter completely refused to go to school one day and she said it was this pair of butter wouldn't melt in their mouths bitches who were scaring her and her wee friend. This was happening in the yard at lunchtime. In fairness as soon as it was reported to my daughters teacher it stopped immediately .

Seathrun66

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Because he believed, wrongly, that if he didn't actually do anything to her then he would get away with it?

He was quite adamant he just left at the park to start with. That was what he planned to say, until under pressure he cracked and admitted the truth

That may be true. Hopefully we'll get to the truth irrespective of whether he's guilty or not. But his lies thus far mean that seems a long way off.

holliehobbie

I did end up moving her to a different primary for the rest of primary school but that was for various other reasons as well.

Seathrun66

Nerdlingr wrote: »

They had the conversation about killing her. Boy B was shown to be a continual liar. Is it plausible that they hatched a plan to kill her...yes given the circumstances! Prosecution presented it and the jury believed it.

The only reason they know about that conversation is because Boy B reported it to the police. And said he didn't take it seriously. Crazy self-incrimination otherwise.

ILoveYourVibes

Seathrun66 wrote: »

That may be true. Hopefully we'll get to the truth irrespective of whether he's guilty or not. But his lies thus far mean that seems a long way off.

Please stop twisting the narrative. He has been FOUND legally guilty. That is not provisional. You should know that.

hatrickpatrick

Suckit wrote: »

He came home from wherever and saw the Garda at his door, and wasn't at all interested.

Doesn't that tell you all you need to know about the probability that he is, indeed, a f*cking scumbag? Who arrives home, finds the Gardaí at their door making enquiries about their children, and isn't at all interested?

Same son's address was found by Gardaí by looking up the PULSE system.

So what was it doing there in the first place, I wonder? Clearly either the son or someone else in the family had come to the attention of the Gardaí before.

All the evidence points towards these people being total scumbags.

STB.

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Never claimed to know more, or point that out from my posts if you'd be so gracious. I posit that the conviction may be unsafe. Thus appealable and winnable. As many case are. On a daily basis if you check the court reports.

Not allowing the doctor to give psychiatric evidence was I believe a judicial error. No justifiable reason for exclusion. That alone will ensure there's an Appeal granted. The court may weigh it up and discount it but not allowing it allows cracks in the conviction.

No recanting on the Gardai interviews. I stated that the defence team will continue to argue they were coercive. I believe they were not but more weight may be given to the argument if the psychiatric evidence is allowed.

Legal system is very clear on what constitutes murder. Some posters here less so. Him being at the scene is insufficient. And if he wasn't aware that a murder was going to take place then he is not guilty.

Read the bloody court reporting. FULL SUMMARY via Irish Times

EXTRACT FROM IRISH TIME REPORT BY CONOR GALLAGHER wrote:

In early 2019 Boy B's legal team asked Dr Colm Humphries, an experienced psychologist specialising in childhood trauma, to examine Boy B and the interview tapes (to minimise the damage done in those interviews)


The defence planned to call Humphries as a witness to explain that Boy B’s lies were the result of trauma rather than an effort to hide his guilt.


Calling him as a witness carried a risk however.


During Boy B’s sessions with the doctor he had given him information about what he saw in the abandoned house that day, information he had failed to give gardaí.


The boy told the doctor he saw Boy A standing over Ana with his trousers open during the attack. And that he saw Ana gasping before going silent.


If Humphries gave defence evidence he would likely be open to cross-examination on these matters, re-enforcing the notion that Boy B continued lying to gardaí up to his final interview.

ILoveYourVibes

Seathrun66 wrote: »

The only reason they know about that conversation is because Boy B reported it to the police. And said he didn't take it seriously. Crazy self-incrimination otherwise.

Correction.
You are not taking it seriously.

You have no idea what Boy B felt. You have never even spoken to him. The Guards have.

Nerdlingr

Seathrun66 wrote: »

That may be true. Hopefully we'll get to the truth irrespective of whether he's guilty or not. But his lies thus far mean that seems a long way off.

Quick question for ya there...you're a lawyer...if you were representing Boy B, would you have employed a "no comment" interview with the Gardai for your client?

Seathrun66

Nerdlingr wrote: »

The fact Boy B brought up the conversation they previously had is foreknowledge. He literally said Boy A told him he wanted to kill Ana.

And he said he didn't take it seriously. If he was so manipulative why would he self-incriminate like that? Kids say loads of crazy stuff so it's understandable that he wouldn't believe Boy A's chatter. And the crucial question for me is why he collected Ana to lead her to a murder scene. Doesn't make any sense.