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

bobbyss

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

That is an horrendous scenario.

Some schools ask for parents' signature on homework journal as a parental involvement.

john123470

Originally Posted by Aisling_Dublin View Post

"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 ..."

This is a very valid point. Ana was knowingly being abused / bullied. Students stood up and left when she sat in their midst. Boys came up and threatened her .. with sex, violence. She ran home distraught on occasions. The school should have stepped in at some point .. i can't speak for the parents - but this behavior created the atmosphere where Boy A and B felt they had a licence to dehumanize and, ultimately, destroy her.

The school itself has some blood on its hands here. Schools need to be more aware / pro active when it comes to bullying. They might appoint class prefects, whatever, to report on bullying when it is encountered and have a visible zero tolerance to same

The school were aware of the bullying and did nothing

Yurt2

john123470 wrote: »

Originally Posted by Aisling_Dublin View Post

"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 ..."

This is a very valid point. Ana was knowingly being abused / bullied. Students stood up and left when she sat in their midst. Boys came up and threatened her .. with sex, violence. She ran home distraught on occasions. The school should have stepped in at some point .. i can't speak for the parents - but this behavior created the atmosphere where Boy A and B felt they had a licence to dehumanize and, ultimately, destroy her.

The school itself has some blood on its hands here. Schools need to be more aware / pro active when it comes to bullying. They might appoint class prefects, whatever, to report on bullying when it is encountered and have a visible zero tolerance to same

The school I went to was a zoo, and very few teachers appeared to care about some of the violence and intimidation that went on. The principal too didn't give a rattlers, cruising towards a pension so why get your hands dirty. A lot of kids were written off by frankly lazy and uncaring 'educators'. There were a couple of genuinely passionate teachers, but they were in the minority in my school I'm afraid.

I was lucky in that I publicly set boundaries for a couple of scrotes early on in secondary school (i.e. I decked them when they tried to rough me up) and I was left alone from there on in.

80sChild

Melanie Tangy Appendix wrote: »

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.

I know the rules have been created to protect all parties and not for a minute would I suggest the guards were anything but meticulous in securing the conviction. The point is should this particular rule be now reviewed in light of the potential lost evidence, for future cases. Dont think anyone here cared for prurient details for their own sake, just perhaps a chance to make sure the pros of this rule outweigh the cons.

Bigbagofcans

Rmulvany wrote: »

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

I've seen the photos. Even younger looking than I had anticipated. Scary that evil walks among us.

Gadgetman496

Two boys are guilty of murder - what happens next?

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2019/0618/1056052-ana-kriegel-trial-what-happens-next/

Grayson

Necro wrote: »

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?

I don't think it should be policed. Well, not by the police. Schools should have a bigger role in this. And as i mentioned before, from a young age children should have classes around consent, bullying, and all that stuff. And it should start in junior infants. By the time they're in their teens it's too late.

Necro

80sChild wrote: »

I know the rules have been created to protect all parties and not for a minute would I suggest the guards were anything but meticulous in securing the conviction. The point is should this particular rule be now reviewed in light of the potential lost evidence, for future cases. Dont think anyone here cared for prurient details for their own sake, just perhaps a chance to make sure the pros of this rule outweigh the cons.

Not just a rule though, it's law. And no I don't think there's any need to review, justice was served in the end and both were convicted of the crimes they committed.

arkle1

I will be slated for this but I feel Boy B may not be guilty...is he guilty of planning to kill her. I cant stop thinking he lied as

1. Afraid of being set up as he said
2. Afraid of Boy A
3. Was traumatised by what happened?

I think he was an evil prick for persistently not telling the truth and am shocked at how long he managed to keep that going ... but I'm not sure he was guilty of murder.

I am wondering how you are so sure on him

This case has me really bothered

decky1

leaving out the smart phones for a minute , these 2 have been found guilty but the law say's they are children what can be done with them ? they'll get a few years inside minded to the best and then back out , murder is murder there should only be one law for that -life in jail and they still cost the tax payer money at that, all this talk of them holding their mammy's hands in court etc does'nt wash with me , it's all a game to them they and the likes of them need to be punished for their crime,they'll get all the help what about the victim's family who got a life sentence and no help.

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

I see Tusla in the news prosecuting parents for their child's poor attendance. The kid has to attend but there's no effort to make it a safe environment. Joke of a country.

Necro

Grayson wrote: »

I don't think it should be policed. Well, not by the police. Schools should have a bigger role in this. And as i mentioned before, from a young age children should have classes around consent, bullying, and all that stuff. And it should start in junior infants. By the time they're in their teens it's too late.

I agree that the Department of Education seems to drag it's feet in this respect.

But parents also need to take some responsibility about these issues too imo. It shouldn't just be left to the schools, it should be a combined effort.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

80sChild wrote: »

I know the rules have been created to protect all parties and not for a minute would I suggest the guards were anything but meticulous in securing the conviction. The point is should this particular rule be now reviewed in light of the potential lost evidence, for future cases. Dont think anyone here cared for prurient details for their own sake, just perhaps a chance to make sure the pros of this rule outweigh the cons.

This is an extraordinary case though, any weighing up of hypothetical benefits him being interviewed without a guardian present can't be applied to all or most cases. For obvious reasons it's not up to the interviewing gards' discretion. The more serious the charge the more carefully they have to proceed and the greater the chance for loss of objectivity.

The interviews as carried out to the letter of the law resulted in a conviction so I'm not seeing how they indicate a need to change these rules.

The poster I was quoting was complaining we "lost our chance to know what happened". That's prurient curiosity pure and simple.

Necro

arkle1 wrote: »

I will be slated for this but I feel Boy B may not be guilty...is he guilty of planning to kill her. I cant stop thinking he lied as

1. Afraid of being set up as he said
2. Afraid of Boy A
3. Was traumatised by what happened?

I think he was an evil prick for persistently not telling the truth and am shocked at how long he managed to keep that going ... but I'm not sure he was guilty of murder.

I am wondering how you are so sure on him

This case has me really bothered

I think we've been over this before though, why on earth does someone who speaks of Ana in interviews with Gardaí after the fact refer to her with such vulgar language?
It's clear he had absolutely no respect for her whatsoever through his own words, even when she had been brutally killed.

So...

Why on earth was he calling to her that day, something he had never done before in his life?


He's as guilty as sin.

Grayson

Necro wrote: »

I agree that the Department of Education seems to drag it's feet in this respect.

But parents also need to take some responsibility about these issues too imo. It shouldn't just be left to the schools, it should be a combined effort.

Sure but at the same time if we expect it to fall on the parents there will be kids that are missed. I mentioned it earlier but a lot of parents would probably be out of their depth. Don't get me wrong, most parents do an ok job but the only qualification you need to be a parent is to have a child and these sort of things should be dealt with by experts.

I should also say that although that kind of approach *might* have stopped the murder, we don't know it would have. But it would probably lessen bullying incidents and would help kids who are being bullied like Ana.

GarIT

More than classes on bullying we need classes on empathy and personal development. Telling a bully bullying is wrong won't stop them. Getting them to understand other people have feelings too and that being different is ok would be much more effective.

Bigbagofcans

Grayson wrote: »

I don't think it should be policed. Well, not by the police. Schools should have a bigger role in this. And as i mentioned before, from a young age children should have classes around consent, bullying, and all that stuff. And it should start in junior infants. By the time they're in their teens it's too late.

Department of Education will argue that they don't have time in the day to have these types of classes.

Scrap all the pointless Religion lessons, significantly reduce time spent on Irish and have a few mandatory classes a week on consent, bullying, mental health, life skills.

AudreyHepburn

arkle1 wrote: »

I will be slated for this but I feel Boy B may not be guilty...is he guilty of planning to kill her. I cant stop thinking he lied as

1. Afraid of being set up as he said
2. Afraid of Boy A
3. Was traumatised by what happened?s

I think he was an evil prick for persistently not telling the truth and am shocked at how long he managed to keep that going ... but I'm not sure he was guilty of murder.

I am wondering how you are so sure on him

This case has me really bothered

He stood by while an innocent young girl was brutally assaulted and murdered and repeatedly lied about it to Gardai, his parents etc.

He deserves all he gets imo - he’s as guilty as Boy A.

Grayson

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

Department of Education will argue that they don't have time in the day to have these types of classes.

Scrap all the pointless Religion lessons, significantly reduce time spent on Irish and have a few mandatory classes a week on consent, bullying, mental health, life skills.

If the money was there I'd make each kid have sessions with a child therapist too. The idea being that if everything is ok they just talk about cartoons or whatever but if they need someone, there's already someone there that they can trust.

It'd never happen though which is a pity.

Sunflower 27

arkle1 wrote: »

I will be slated for this but I feel Boy B may not be guilty...is he guilty of planning to kill her. I cant stop thinking he lied as

1. Afraid of being set up as he said
2. Afraid of Boy A
3. Was traumatised by what happened?

I think he was an evil prick for persistently not telling the truth and am shocked at how long he managed to keep that going ... but I'm not sure he was guilty of murder.

I am wondering how you are so sure on him

This case has me really bothered

Once boy A was found with Ana's blood all over his shoes, bag, etc he was going to be charged. What did boy B have to be afraid of?

There was no DNA evidence on him, I'm sure his own legal team made him very aware of that so a set-up by Boy A wasn't plausible

nehemiah

decky1 wrote: »

leaving out the smart phones for a minute , these 2 have been found guilty but the law say's they are children what can be done with them ? they'll get a few years inside minded to the best and then back out , murder is murder there should only be one law for that -life in jail and they still cost the tax payer money at that, all this talk of them holding their mammy's hands in court etc does'nt wash with me , it's all a game to them they and the likes of them need to be punished for their crime,they'll get all the help what about the victim's family who got a life sentence and no help.

Victims ' families do get help, they would have had access to Family Liaison officers throughout this time.

But anyway, you're just expressing outrage. Darren Goodwin served 13 years in jail from the age of 16. This is not 'life' of course and perhaps not much in the scheme of things but there seems to be little chance that these two (especially Boy A) will serve any less than that time. My prediction is that Boy A will serve no less than 20 years given the violence and sexual nature of the crime.

Dontfadeaway

rekdtangle wrote: »

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

Nothing comes up when I put in his name. Maybe I seen the wrong one

AudreyHepburn

Necro wrote: »

I agree that the Department of Education seems to drag it's feet in this respect.

But parents also need to take some responsibility about these issues too imo. It shouldn't just be left to the schools, it should be a combined effort.

Agreed a combined effort is the only way deal with complex issues like this. Leaving it to one party or another to deal with alone is a recipe for disaster.

I also think a better understanding of psychiatric and psychological issues in children and young people is needed. Ordinary joe soap parent or teacher may not be able to recognize the symptoms of say psychopathy or sociopathy or may not understand them for what they are if they do see them. A better understanding could stop cases like this before they happen.

.......

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

He stood by while an innocent young girl was brutally assaulted and murdered and repeatedly lied about it to Gardai, his parents etc.

He deserves all he gets imo - he’s as guilty as Boy A.

Its the cover up that disturbs me the most.

I can understand that he might have lured her there, maybe not realising Boy A was serious to murder her. I can understand he might have feared Boy A and was frightened to intervene or it all happened so quickly that he was in shock etc...

I can even understand him making up a story about being attacked by 2 men - in the heat of the moment.

But the repeated lying and attempting to cover it up the whole time in all the interviews afterwards, when the seriousness of the charge was in front of him and the knowledge that Boy A couldnt hurt him etc...

Im sure his legal team told him to sing like a canary and save himself. But instead he just kept misleading and misleading.

Bigbagofcans

We should be leading by example to younger people. As a poster mentioned earlier that so many older people are glued to Love Island which features bullying and promoting taunting/negative among others.

Also, parents with their heads stuck in their smartphones and telling their children to get off theirs aren't helping matters.

wicorthered

arkle1 wrote: »

I will be slated for this but I feel Boy B may not be guilty...is he guilty of planning to kill her. I cant stop thinking he lied as

1. Afraid of being set up as he said
2. Afraid of Boy A
3. Was traumatised by what happened?

I think he was an evil prick for persistently not telling the truth and am shocked at how long he managed to keep that going ... but I'm not sure he was guilty of murder.

I am wondering how you are so sure on him

This case has me really bothered

Comments like these sicken me. Oh poor old so and so, not his fault, someone tricked him, threatened him etc. Why is there always someone else at fault, is there no more personal responsibility left in Ireland? He might be 13, but when I was 13 I knew my friends shouldn't kill school girls!

Christ he stood by and watched a young girl murdered in cold blood, then did his best to cover it up. This scumbag is no victim, he's as much at fault as Boy A!

nehemiah

...

SirGerryAdams

arkle1 wrote: »

I will be slated for this but I feel Boy B may not be guilty...is he guilty of planning to kill her. I cant stop thinking he lied as

1. Afraid of being set up as he said
2. Afraid of Boy A
3. Was traumatised by what happened?

I think he was an evil prick for persistently not telling the truth and am shocked at how long he managed to keep that going ... but I'm not sure he was guilty of murder.

I am wondering how you are so sure on him

This case has me really bothered

TOO MANY LIES.

He was never in the house. He was in the house. He saw her walking away. He heard her scream. He went into the house before Ana and Boy A. He looked in the door and ran away.

Boy B told so many lies we still don't know what exactly happened!

Grayson

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/ana-kriegel-garda-will-investigate-anyone-sharing-photos-of-murderers-1.3930854

The Garda has said it will investigate anyone sharing the identities of the two 14-year-olds convicted of murdering Ana Kriégel.

Boy A and Boy B, as they are known publicly, were found guilty by a jury on Tuesday of murdering the 14-year-old girl in Lucan last year. Boy A was also found guilty of the aggravated sexual assault of Ana on the same date.

Since the verdict, photographs claiming to show the two boys have circulated widely on WhatsApp and social media.

It is understood gardaí have been alerted to several incidents of the boys photographs being shared online. The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is also aware of the issue and is considering making an application for those sharing to photos to be held in contempt.

Under the Children Act 2001, it is a criminal offence to identify children who are parties to court proceedings. This includes witnesses and defendants.

The offence carries a prison term of up to 12 months and a €1,500 word fine on conviction in the District Court or a term of up to three years and a €10,000 on conviction in a higher court.

So maybe don't share the pictures.

Also, it appears your punishment will be a €1500 word fine (I think an intern who has an assignment wrote that bit).

retro:electro

arkle1 wrote: »

I will be slated for this but I feel Boy B may not be guilty...is he guilty of planning to kill her. I cant stop thinking he lied as

1. Afraid of being set up as he said
2. Afraid of Boy A
3. Was traumatised by what happened?

I think he was an evil prick for persistently not telling the truth and am shocked at how long he managed to keep that going ... but I'm not sure he was guilty of murder.

I am wondering how you are so sure on him

This case has me really bothered

The judge said that intention to kill does not require elaborate pre-planning. You see, even if we believe his version of events where his aim was to paint himself in the best possible light, he still painted a picture of a remarkably cruel, negligent and dangerous liar. He received a text message from boy A a month before the act informing him that he intends to kill Ana. Boy B responded “in your dreams”, and laughed it off as a joke. If we are to believe that he led Ana to boy A because he was going to tell her he didn’t fancy her then he is a remarkably cruel person. If we are to believe he saw Ana being thrown to the ground and assaulted and he left as she screamed for her life and told no one for days only lied and deflected then he is a remarkably cruel and dangerous person. I believe he is a lot more involved than he is letting on, his only saving grace is there is no evidence to prove he directly assaulted her but he assisted in the murder by leading her there.

They saw her as sub- human. They saw her as disposable and less than. They showed her absolutely no respect before, during or after and his comments about her being “slutty” give an insight into how he viewed her. When I was his age, being questioned in such a serious manner would have me on my knees in bits but he continually played a game of cat and mouse with the guards, sussing them on what they knew until they eventually peeled away the lies one by one.

Throughout questioning, in between lying, he yawned and stretched and acted in unashamed arrogance and treated the whole thing like it was a massive inconvenience to his time. A detachment like that to such a serious situation is concerning and who knows what a detached mind like that is capable of.
It makes me sick to think I even breathe the same air as these cretins.