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

nehemiah

El_Bee wrote: »

Economically right, but socially very very liberal; pro divorce, pro abortion, pro gay marriage. pro mass immigration (not saying any of those things are bad before you all lynch me, but definitely not right wing positions).

3 out of those 4 were the result of a referendum voted on by the people.

Nerdlingr

Aisling_Dublin wrote: »

I can't wrap my head around why the Ana's parents never took her out of the school seeing clearly that she was suffering, why didn't they take her out after the first ever bullying incident, after the death threats or even after one if the teachers confided in them about how gravely concerned she was.... Take her out to safety, home school, miss a year, find tutors, or no tutors, a vocational school maybe, anything to save her. Can't forgive them for their passivity, although they are of course their own judges and punishers now.

And yet here you are judging and punishing them on here.
Somehow, I dont think they're looking for your forgiveness either.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

80sChild wrote: »

I think solicitor was present also IIRC? All is recorded anyway so Guards have protection there. I do agree with poster who said imminent confession/elaboration could have been sacrificed in this moment.

If his mother had left the room and he'd confessed his defence would have tried to have it ruled out, said that that created an intimidating atmosphere and hence a false confession. Those rules are there for good reasons and the interviewing Gardai did a pretty bloody impressive job doing things correctly and getting it done.

facehugger99

Aisling_Dublin wrote: »

I can't wrap my head around why the Ana's parents never took her out of the school seeing clearly that she was suffering, why didn't they take her out after the first ever bullying incident, after the death threats or even after one if the teachers confided in them about how gravely concerned she was.... Take her out to safety, home school, miss a year, find tutors, or no tutors, a vocational school maybe, anything to save her. Can't forgive them for their passivity, although they are of course their own judges and punishers now.

Aren't they lucky to have you to judge them.

Think I heard Leo V on the radio saying they're going to clamp down on porn or something....how about clamping down on bullying? You know like have teachers actually do something instead of turning a blind eye?

Necro

80sChild wrote:

I think solicitor was present also IIRC? All is recorded anyway so Guards have protection there. I do agree with poster who said imminent confession/elaboration could have been sacrificed in this moment.

Maybe but that's the law so any divergence from that would have any defence lawyer worth their salt having it thrown out as inadmissible.

rekdtangle

Have seen the names and photos of boy A & B. Strangely if you google Boy A's name all the Ana newspaper articles come up. How does that happen if they aren't named in any of the articles?

RIP Ana

tayto lover

Boy B ain’t getting off. He’s guilty and the jury made the right decision.
He’s where he should be ie behind lock and key.

El_Bee

nehemiah wrote: »

3 out of those 4 were the result of a referendum voted on by the people.

But received full support from all mainstream parties, FF & FG included.

Grayson

Melanie Tangy Appendix wrote: »

If his mother had left the room and he'd confessed his defence would have tried to have it ruled out, said that that created an intimidating atmosphere and hence a false confession. Those rules are there for good reasons and the interviewing Gardai did a pretty bloody impressive job doing things correctly and getting it done.

I mentioned the central park 5 earlier in the thread. Some of them were 13 or 14. they were questioned by police for hours without a guardian there.

The rules about how interviews are conducted with children are there for a reason.

Necro

Deleted User wrote: »

Think I heard Leo V on the radio saying they're going to clamp down on porn or something....how about clamping down on bullying? You know like have teachers actually do something instead of turning a blind eye?

Bullying these days isn't just the typical tough guy in the class pushing you down in the mud or beating the sh1t out of you though.

It's exclusion from social groups and activities.
It's withering looks from your peers if you try to speak to them.
It's online a lot of the time and away from school grounds.
It's through social media and different apps, groups sharing stupid pictures and videos of X or Y in silly situations.

I'm not sure there are enough laws on the planet to cover the different forms that bullying takes these days.

Melanie Tangy Appendix

Melanie Tangy Appendix wrote: »

80sChild wrote: »

I think solicitor was present also IIRC? All is recorded anyway so Guards have protection there. I do agree with poster who said imminent confession/elaboration could have been sacrificed in this moment.

If his mother had left the room and he'd confessed his defence would have tried to have it ruled out, said that that created an intimidating atmosphere and hence a false confession. Those rules are there for good reasons and the interviewing Gardai did a pretty bloody impressive job doing things correctly and getting it done.

Should being arrested and interviewed for murder be a walk in the park? Forcing a confession is totally different to what we are talking about here. It's all on camera and recorded. The rules should change about parents being there 100% of the time. We lost probably the best chance of ever knowing exactly what happened because of pc over the top nonsense.

Ulysses Gaze

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Psychopath A & Sociopath B.

Very little could be done in school for students like this.

Little point in trying to treat them either.
Neither is a treatable condition.

jimmycrackcorm

Deleted User wrote: »

Think I heard Leo V on the radio saying they're going to clamp down on porn or something....how about clamping down on bullying? You know like have teachers actually do something instead of turning a blind eye?

My kid was bullied at school. We didn't know they missed a third of the school year, instead going to the park and sitting alone in the cold and rain instead of going in to face being bullied.

None of the several subject teachers passed a blind eye that they were missing so much roll call. We only found out when tusla contacted us at the end of the year to find it why were such bad parents to not send then to school.


The teachers don't give a crap they're just there to complain about their pay and enjoy their time off in summer

nehemiah

El_Bee wrote: »

But received full support from all mainstream parties, FF & FG included.

Because they knew which way the wind was blowing.

Divorce was close but the other two were overwhelming.

Incidentally only two countries still prohibit divorce - Philippines and the Vatican.

Grayson

Necro wrote: »

Bullying these days isn't just the typical tough guy in the class pushing you down in the mud or beating the sh1t out of you though.

It's exclusion from social groups and activities.
It's withering looks from your peers if you try to speak to them.
It's online a lot of the time and away from school grounds.
It's through social media and different apps, groups sharing stupid pictures and videos of X or Y in silly situations.

I'm not sure there are enough laws on the planet to cover the different forms that bullying takes these days.

To be fair you're also describing bullying that existed years ago. The only difference is technology so it follows the kids home. Exclusion, looks, nasty talk. That's all part of bullying and always has been.

Necro

Deleted User wrote: »

Should being arrested and interviewed for murder be a walk in the park? Forcing a confession is totally different to what we are talking about here. It's all on camera and recorded. The rules should change about parents being there 100% of the time. We lost probably the best chance of ever knowing exactly what happened because of pc over the top nonsense.

It's not 'PC' to have a minor interviewed in the presence of their parent/guardian, it's written into the laws of the land.

It's for the protection of the Gardaí as much as it is those interviewed. I personally don't see an issue with it tbh.

jimmycrackcorm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

My kid was bullied at school. We didn't know they missed a third of the school year, instead going to the park and sitting alone in the cold and rain instead of going in to face being bullied.

None of the several subject teachers passed a blind eye that they were missing so much roll call. We only found out when tusla contacted us at the end of the year to find it why were such bad parents to not send then to school.


The teachers don't give a crap they're just there to complain about their pay and enjoy their time off in summer

The ones who do/did give a **** have that taken out of them pretty quickly.

Re the online bullying, is something radical like banning smartphones in schools the answer, or banning under 18 or x age from owning smartphones a route?

Mardy Bum

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Psychopath A & Sociopath B.

Very little could be done in school for students like this.

Yeah it's more the bullying/social media that Ana and the likes of the Gallagher sisters in Donegal endured that I'd be hopeful of society realistically tackling someday soon. Also...a major update of how sex education is taught could help.

How a school or even society could identify the potential psychopaths and dangerous sociopaths though, I'm really not sure. Hopefully something about that can be learned from this tragic case.

InTheShadows

Deleted User wrote: »

Think I heard Leo V on the radio saying they're going to clamp down on porn or something....how about clamping down on bullying? You know like have teachers actually do something instead of turning a blind eye?

Face book, Whatapp etc.. aren't porn sites per say so i guess Leo will leave them to it even though the likes of them is also a real issue here. Can't be annoying Zuckerburg Leo what.

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

Re the online bullying, is something radical like banning smartphones in schools the answer, or banning under 18 or x age from owning smartphones a route?

Bullying existed before smartphones and I think it'd be unfair to take smartphones off all children/teens. Perhaps better parental controls on them though, where you can buy them pre-installed as such that they have to be linked to a parent's phone who can monitor everything they do on them. Bullying happens a lot in schools because that's where the teens are/meet the most, but as much as teachers should be doing, parents should also be making sure both their children aren't being bullied nor bullying others.

weldoninhio

Aisling_Dublin wrote: »

I can't wrap my head around why the Ana's parents never took her out of the school seeing clearly that she was suffering, why didn't they take her out after the first ever bullying incident, after the death threats or even after one if the teachers confided in them about how gravely concerned she was.... Take her out to safety, home school, miss a year, find tutors, or no tutors, a vocational school maybe, anything to save her. Can't forgive them for their passivity, although they are of course their own judges and punishers now.

WTF!!

Necro

Grayson wrote: »

To be fair you're also describing bullying that existed years ago. The only difference is technology so it follows the kids home. Exclusion, looks, nasty talk. That's all part of bullying and always has been.

Point is how do you police it or write laws to deal with a nasty look or excluding someone?

It's absolutely abhorrent behaviour but how can you legislate for it criminally?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Should being arrested and interviewed for murder be a walk in the park? Forcing a confession is totally different to what we are talking about here. It's all on camera and recorded. The rules should change about parents being there 100% of the time. We lost probably the best chance of ever knowing exactly what happened because of pc over the top nonsense.

I'm not saying a confession would have been forced, I'm saying a legal team would have argued that was a possibility and got it ruled inadmissible.

Those rules are there to protect children who have an assumption of innocence, to make sure charges and convictions are sound. They're based on sound reasoning and decades of evidence.

Unfortunately for you, satisfying the public's prurient curiosity about the details of a case seems to have been pretty far down the gards list of priorities here, and that of the people who formulated these rules.

SirGerryAdams

Deleted User wrote: »

Re the online bullying, is something radical like banning smartphones in schools the answer, or banning under 18 or x age from owning smartphones a route?

I left school over 10 years ago and even then phones were not allowed and would be confiscated if you were found to have one.

I suspect nowadays parents demanded they have them for safety reasons.

Discipline is becoming less and less strict. Example is hitting kids. If I ever did something bad like telling someone to F off or smashing something because I was angry I got a kick up the hole from the auld lad. It did me the world of good.

Now I believe it's all about reflection corners and such nonsense. Kids need to learn they will be punished with an equal punishment for things they do wrong.

If a kid steals a packet of sweets from a shop, being sent to a corner to reflect is no good.

znv6i3h7kqf9ys

El_Bee wrote: »

Economically right, but socially very very liberal; pro divorce, pro abortion, pro gay marriage. pro mass immigration (not saying any of those things are bad before you all lynch me, but definitely not right wing positions).

Bollox. All the liberal things you've listed there don't cost any money and make the govt look good. The new environmental one is a peach too, ban petrol and diesel........ easy with the stroke of a pen but where is the infrastructure to offer an alternative. They always fall short when they have to get the cheque book out

Necro

weldoninhio wrote: »

WTF!!

Honestly it's best to ignore that sort of nonsense.

Sunflower 27

Necro wrote: »

Bullying these days isn't just the typical tough guy in the class pushing you down in the mud or beating the sh1t out of you though.

It's exclusion from social groups and activities.
It's withering looks from your peers if you try to speak to them.
It's online a lot of the time and away from school grounds.
It's through social media and different apps, groups sharing stupid pictures and videos of X or Y in silly situations.

I'm not sure there are enough laws on the planet to cover the different forms that bullying takes these days.

If I had to choose I'd prefer a punch in the arm to the psychological and emotional abuse many young people experience on a daily basis.

It can have life-long effects and doesn't just go away when the kids leave school.

Rmulvany

Didn't check back the pages to see if this is already mentioned...

Pictures of both "Boy A" and "Boy B" have started to be shared on Facebook, I spotted them earlier today, I can foresee lots of people sharing posts in order to get some level of awareness about their identities

Presuming that the boys in the pictures are in fact the guilty parties it makes it all the more shocking as they are so young looking to produce that level of evil!

I know they have already been found guilty of murder but would this level of social hijacking be damaging towards them getting a fair sentencing? I know that social media can definitely have an effect on an ongoing trial