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

.......

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

In what way? Acceptance or prohibition?

I trend towards the latter but not sure how it can be enforced.

Neither exactly.

Education. You educate them about the dangers. But not in the creepy way the nuns educated us about the dangers of sex when we were nippers.

In a properly age appropriate manner. And you also educate parents on what is an appropriate level of device access/contact/control etc for a child.

dickangel

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

She was 5'8. She wasn't a small child. The coward wanted to knock her out or at least maim her so they had the upper hand.

We don't know how tall/big the boys were but 5'8" at 13 is very unusual.

Boy A was supposedly tall for his age, and skilled in martial arts.

Former Observer

Gimme A Pound wrote: »

Nowhere did he say anything to condone execution of the boys. He said the anger is understandable, which it is. Not everyone is all cool and indifferent like you.

Not the brightest spark are you. Your whole post is litany of muddled thinking.


I didn't copy the original post in its entirety because nothing substantive was said by that poster and I didn't feel like clogging up the thread with a totally redundant post a second time. Pretty much like what I'm going to do with yours. And I reckon that poster can fight his own battles little man.

SirGerryAdams

....... wrote: »

Everything you have asked has been extensively reported on!

It's not fact though...

Boy B had changed his story so many times. I still don't think he told the truth anyways. For example at first he claimed he wasn't in the house, then he said he was. Then he said he left when he saw Boy A flip her over but none of that is fact.

Cryptopagan

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

The sad reality is that since they have no remorse, they will not be haunted by what they did to Ana. They will be released in their twenties with the freedom to move away and start their lives again.

Dunno about that. There are strict parole conditions attached to released murderers and they can be sent back to prison for breaking them. I don’t think you can just go and relocate to another country to get away from that.

joe40

....... wrote: »

I dunno - I think its just realistic to expect that kids of 11 might be sexting.

Or accessing pornography.

Not all are, but its not a tiny minority either. Its worse to pretend it isnt happening at all.

It happens, so we need to deal with that reality.

Of course it is better to deal with the reality that this happens, especially among vulnerable teens.
And it is better to assume that they will come into contact with porn at an early age.

But the reality is that the vast majority of our teens are doing fine, they are able to handle social media in a responsible way and are forming healthy relationships.

By all means teach about the dangers of the internet and cyber bullying it was just the 75% figure I find hard to behave.

I work in a large sec school with range of socio economic backgrounds and issues of under age sexting have come up it is still quite rare.

simongurnick

A lot of talk on here is around internet usage, but that wasn't used in court. What was discussed in the case is the question of one of the boys being a goth and involvement in satanic culture. I wonder how much of that stuff was at play here or were these two scumbags evil since birth?

Gimme A Pound

....... wrote: »

I dunno - I think its just realistic to expect that kids of 11 might be sexting.

Or accessing pornography.

Not all are, but its not a tiny minority either. Its worse to pretend it isnt happening at all.

It happens, so we need to deal with that reality.

Oh I don't dispute that. It's "ah shur they're all at it leave them to it" attitude I'm referring to.

Necro wrote: »

Wasn't there plans to introduce some sort of licensing to access those sites bandied about before? I know there's always a way around that but surely in the light of cases like this something should be considered.

I'm not a prude or anything, I've watched porn on the web many times - but the fact that it's free to access by absolutely anyone is a bit weird in all honesty.

People lost their sh1t over that licencing thing. All very lady doth protest too much.

You shouldn't have to say you're not a prude. Of course you're not. Objecting to children who were born in 2004/5 having easy access to extremely dark porn a few years back has nothing to do with being a prude.

If an adult showed it to them it would be considered sexual abuse. So if it's damaging in one context, then it's damaging in others.

Gadgetman496

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Their photos were shared on FB earlier

I'm sure plenty of people saw those post before they were taken down

I know that & it won't be long before they become household names one way or another.

My point is that I don't see why the law should afford them anonymity for life.

.......

joe40 wrote: »

Of course it is better to deal with the reality that this happens, especially among vulnerable teens.
And it is better to assume that they will come into contact with porn at an early age.

But the reality is that the vast majority of our teens are doing fine, they are able to handle social media in a responsible way and are forming healthy relationships.

By all means teach about the dangers of the internet and cyber bullying it was just the 75% figure I find hard to behave.

I work in a large sec school with range of socio economic backgrounds and issues of under age sexting have come up it is still quite rare.

I elaborated on the 74% above - btw I wasnt at the meeting where the figure was mentioned, just relaying what my colleague told me.

(who then went home and checked his kids phone and lol and behold found dick pics).

Woke Hogan

Gimme A Pound wrote: »

Was responding to that Observer account specifically, but to answer you, no. Challenging the execution posts can be done in a reasoned manner like Stu has done above, rather than "I'm disgusted by a thing you typed about two murderers and you've a low IQ and wah wah", pretending as if the anger is over something minor.

As far as I am concerned, promoting the death penalty is the height of ignorance and the suggestion of a moron. It is an unreasonable suggestion and it doesn't deserve a reasoned response.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

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.

Yeah.

This case struck a chord with me because whilst not exactly friendless as a child and teen, charges of weirdness followed me around my whole formative years. I was very socially awkward and was not handling well the turbulence at home. Friends fell away as secondary school wore on and I was pretty much on my own at the end. But in college, I was grand. Gained confidence, made friends and being weird was not considered a fatal flaw.

If Ana had got the chance to tough out her teenage years, everything would likely have been okay. I’m sad she’ll never feel that flush of excitement at making friends and seeing the world and its possibilities open up in front of her.

SirGerryAdams

Would guards have checked for text messages on the phones? Or facebook messages or connections?

I don't think there was anything said about those?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

dickangel wrote: »

The parents only knew Boy B's first name and didn't know the parents. So I think it was Boy B on the system for something pretty insignificant to the whole case.

No, the Kriegels found out his surname from social media, I'm not sure how one would go about finding anyone on a database with just a first name. But I'd say you're right he himself was on there for something minor. Not too familiar with it but I assume a caution for vandalism or something like that would be logged there.

Sunflower 27

dickangel wrote: »

Boy A was supposedly tall for his age, and skilled in martial arts.

Which is why he did the killing and B brought him to her.

Strazdas

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

She was 5'8. She wasn't a small child. The coward wanted to knock her out or at least maim her so they had the upper hand.

We don't know how tall/big the boys were but 5'8" at 13 is very unusual.

I believe A is supposed to be the taller and stronger of the two. The key point anyway is that it strongly suggests premeditation and a planned attack on her. Very hard to believe that B wasn't aware of this when he brought her to the abandoned house - this must have come up in conversation between A and B.

Sunflower 27

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

Would guards have checked for text messages on the phones? Or facebook messages or connections?

I don't think there was anything said about those?

Yes, good point. No mention of texts especially at the crucial time B got Ana. You'd imagine a text to A saying she'd agreed to go with him and they were on their way

The White Wolf

theguzman wrote: »

Leftwing social democratic parties across Europe I was alluding to, you know the leftist SJW types who hate their own countries. The Macrons and Jeremy Corbyns of this world.

Jeremy Corbyn who is supporting Brexit by respecting the fact more or less have the country supported leaving the EU. That Jeremy Corbyn?

AudreyHepburn

simongurnick wrote: »

A lot of talk on here is around internet usage, but that wasn't used in court. What was discussed in the case is the question of one of the boys being a goth and involvement in satanic culture. I wonder how much of that stuff was at play here or were these two scumbags evil since birth?

I’m all for trying to understand what drives people to commit terrible acts and figure out warning signs for future potential cases but a lot that talk with regard to this particular case just smacks of scapegoating to me.

The blame for what happen to Ana Kriegal lies solely with Boy A and Boy B. Not their parents, not the school, not the internet, just those two clearly unwell and unhinged boys.

dickangel

Melanie Tangy Appendix wrote: »

No, the Kriegels found out his surname from social media, I'm not sure how one would go about finding anyone on a database with just a first name. But I'd say you're right he himself was on there for something minor. Not too familiar with it but I assume a caution for vandalism or something like that would be logged there.

Similar to finding someone on social media with just a first name. Enter the name plus the town/locality.

Gimme A Pound

Former Observer wrote: »

Not the brightest spark are you. Your whole post is litany of muddled thinking.


I didn't copy the original post in its entirety because nothing substantive was said by that poster and I didn't feel like clogging up the thread with a totally redundant post a second time. Pretty much like what I'm going to do with yours. And I reckon that poster can fight his own battles little man.

I'm a woman.

And that's just a load of padding meaning "I like to dishonestly cherry pick because it gets me out of having to respond to points which I can't." It was taken completely out of context - it had nothing to do with virtue signalling and it wasn't cringey.

Also, if a person doesn't agree with you, it doesn't mean they're not the brightest.

Now go back to your faux concern for the boys and your faux puzzlement at the anger, and your lording it over the plebs in order to feel so much more sophisticated and enlightened.

Never mind that a young girl was butchered.

I don't agree with the execution posts either but there are more pressing concerns around this case than words from anonymous accounts. And to get so vocal about them - much more so than the actual case, is downright weird.

Dual wheels

At the age of 13/14 you are old enough to know that killing someone is wrong wrong wrong, to have planned it is nothing short of disgusting sick and twisted. I know that when I was 14 I knew not to do anything that would potentially land me in trouble with the gardai because I knew what my parents would do, I also knew that you never ever hit a girl, so whilst these boys are sick and twisted individuals who should never ever life in civilized society again, a lot of the blame has to go on the parents who obviously didn’t do their job, <snip>, they obviously thought that them and their kids were above morality and the law, either way, both sets of families lives are finished, they will have to move away, good enough for them, it’s the victims family that can never get away from this, those two boys will be out on the streets in less than 10 years and will probably be a bigger danger to society by then

Grayson

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

In these cases where emotions run high a few people will demand the death penalty which I am personally opposed to. To a certain extent it is understandable.

However that tends to bring in the virtue signallers, who, while silent enough on the actual crime, oppose the death penalty, big up their IQ, and decry the red top reading masses for their revenge fantasys.

A plague on their houses. Now is not the time or place.

I think you'd find that the people who oppose the death penalty have already expressed horror at this crime. Implying that someone who is against the death penality doesn't give a fcuk about what happened to the poor girl is just horrible.

It's also illogical. Why would someone who is against the death penalty not feel for a teenage girl who was killed?

dickangel

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Yes, good point. No mention of texts especially at the crucial time B got Ana. You'd imagine a text to A saying she'd agreed to go with him and they were on their way

Boy B kept losing his phones. There obviously wasn't a text to that nature sent from their phones.

kildare lad

....... wrote: »

A couple of years ago a colleague went to a pre-secondary school parent teacher meeting type thing with all the other parents and some IT security expert.

The IT guy told them that something like 74% of 11 year olds had sent a naked or partially naked picture of themselves on a social media platform.

Pretty much every parent in the rooms shook their heads and said "no - not my kid".

My son goes to a disco for 5th and 6th class every few weeks. I collect him after it and the amount of kids coming outside and taking iPhones out of their pockets is unreal. These kids are all 11 or 12 years old. It's far to young to have an iPhone. Parents should be a bit more responsible and not let their kids have one. I can understand a phone for contacting your child but it doesn't have to be a smartphone. I didn't have a phone till I was 15 and neither did my friends and we managed to survive fine.

I know it's a different era we live in now, but one pic or video of the kid doing sonething stupid . Then its shared to everyone in the school. Some kids at a young age wouldn't be able to take it mentally and top themselves. I'm glad we had none of that growing up and could entertain ourselves without technology.

Sunflower 27

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I’m all for trying to understand what drives people to commit terrible acts and figure out warning signs for future potential cases but a lot that talk with regard to this particular case just smacks of scapegoating to me.

The blame for what happen to Ana Kriegal lies solely with Boy A and Boy B. Not their parents, not the school, not the internet, just those two clearly unwell and unhinged boys.

I think in the initial aftermath people are talking about the crime in a wider sense, which is only natural. I think most are of the opinion the blame lies with the boys. Not many are minimising their role over anyone else.

I think it's naive to rule out other influences entirely though.

Necro

Gimme A Pound wrote: »

People lost their sh1t over that licencing thing. All very lady doth protest too much.

You shouldn't have to say you're not a prude. Of course you're not. Objecting to children who were born in 2004/5 having easy access to extremely dark porn a few years back has nothing to do with being a prude.

If an adult showed it to them it would be considered sexual abuse. So if it's damaging in one context, then it's damaging in others.

I agree, I think it's bonkers how easy it is for kids to access that sort of material. And they are outstripping all of us with ways of accessing it too, that's the main concern.

I'm not that old but I expect in about 5 years time my eldest will likely run rings around me when it comes to electronics and IT. And it scares the bejaysus out of me tbh.

dickangel

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Which is why he did the killing and B brought him to her.

I'm just responding to you saying we don't know how big the boys were, we know of them was tall for his age. The Irish Times article has all the info you need.

joe40

....... wrote: »

I elaborated on the 74% above - btw I wasnt at the meeting where the figure was mentioned, just relaying what my colleague told me.

(who then went home and checked his kids phone and lol and behold found dick pics).

Yeah, sorry I saw your elaboration after I had posted.
Your poor friend that must have been awkward.

GreeBo

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Dunno about that. There are strict parole conditions attached to released murderers and they can be sent back to prison for breaking them. I don’t think you can just go and relocate to another country to get away from that.

If they get life in Ireland then it doesnt necessarily mean they are in prison for life, just that they have a life sentence. They could get out after X years, but at any time they can be locked up again.