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

Grayson

BarryD2 wrote: »

Can't what? The legislation protects the identity of the convicted boys, but does it protect the names of their parents? And if it does, how far does that extend? Their grandparents, uncles and aunts? Neighbours? Teachers? School? How far can you go?

I can see the merit in their photographs or names not being published but I'm less convinced about their adult connections.

Anything that would enable you to identify them. Saying a person is from a large town doesn't help you identify the person. The same goes for a school. naming a family member greatly reduces the number of possibilities.

Boom_Bap

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

It depends how far back he was standing. Blood may not have reached him. He could of got rid of his clothes if it had.

If he put on gloves there would be no fingerprints either.

Not just blood and fingerprints, there are lots and lots of other things that can be transferred.
If his story is to be believed then he wouldn't have been there for any bloodshed.

But he was in close proximity to her for a few kilometers and at the site of her killing, there would have to have been some transfer of something to his clothes that remain unaccounted for.
What about his phone, did I read that it went 'missing' as well?

jimmynokia

screamer wrote: »

In the current trial the judge has forbidden the identification of the thugs. It’s not automatic, and they can be named if it’s in the public interest. In that other case the judge either didn’t impose reporting restrictions or instructed he be named I’d imagine.

The important bit, It is in the public interest why is it not after what they did..

Boggles

tuxy wrote: »

Here's why, no penalty for a not guilty plea, hoping that Garda would slip up and it would be downgraded to manslaughter.
This needs to change, there needs to be a penalty for dragging out a long case in front of a grieving family in the hopes of getting off on a technicality.

There is incentive to plead guilty.

Which in reality means there is a penalty for not pleading guilty in cases like these where the sentence isn't mandatory.

Grayson

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

Firstly haven't read all the info in the thread. Secondly heartbreaking what happend and I hope these two Cnuts rot in prison for the rest if their adult lives.

Forgive me if I'm.wrong but in a murder case pleading guilty still gets you the mandatory life sentence so of course you'll roll the dice.and try and use a technicality to get off some where or cause doubt.

Thanks. People have mentioned it already.

And it's understandable that you haven't read the whole thread

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I also see Boy B appealing and possibly winning an appeal.

No forensic evidence linking him to the scene.
No evidence that he planned this in advance (isn't that the difference murder and manslaughter?)

It also looks like a serious amount of manipulation from Boy A (who absolutely should rot, btw)
And reading between the lines of the reports it looks like there's a lot of psychological abuse coming from his father ("I tried to make him into a man, but he wasn't interested")

Was there ever a reason as to why they were tried together? I can't see why Boy B's barrister agreed to that.

It's such an absolute horror show though. My heart goes out to Ana and her parents, knowing how she suffered. My baby got extra squeezes over the last few days.

Horrific stuff.

I believe they did try for separate trials. The judge overruled that.

Pre trial, Boy A’s lawyers concentrated on applying to have the indictment severed i.e. having Boy A tried separately to Boy B. Their reasoning was the jury was bound to be prejudiced against their client by hearing Boy B repeatedly accuse their client of attacking Ana during his interviews.

The rules of evidence state the interviews of one defendant cannot be used against a co-accused. Boy A’s defence team argued that the jurors could not help but be influenced by the content of the interviews, even if they were warned it was not relevant to the case against their client.

Their application before McDermott failed. “It would be a distortion of the factual background if the entire factual matrix of what happened in the lead up to the death of Ms Kriegel was not set out in full to the jury,” the judge ruled on April 12th. He undertook to give jurors strong warnings about not relying on Boy B’s interviews when considering the case against Boy A.

From article linked earlier

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/ana-kriegel-murder-trial-the-complete-story-1.3929570?mode=amp

STB.

Deleted User wrote: »

I also see Boy B appealing and possibly winning an appeal.

No forensic evidence linking him to the scene.
No evidence that he planned this in advance (isn't that the difference murder and manslaughter?)

It also looks like a serious amount of manipulation from Boy A (who absolutely should rot, btw)
And reading between the lines of the reports it looks like there's a lot of psychological abuse coming from his father ("I tried to make him into a man, but he wasn't interested")

Was there ever a reason as to why they were tried together? I can't see why Boy B's barrister agreed to that.

It's such an absolute horror show though. My heart goes out to Ana and her parents, knowing how she suffered. My baby got extra squeezes over the last few days.

Horrific stuff.

Well you need to read the reports again as he repeatedly lied to the Garda. After 8 interviews they got some of what happened. He also told the doctor who was engaged by the parents (to address his lying behaviour as being PTSD) even more stuff that he didn't disclose to the Garda.


You don't need to read between the lines. And this is not CSI. His own admissions were enough to satisfy the jury.

Criminal Law Act, 1997
Penalties for assisting offenders

7.—(1) Any person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the commission of an indictable offence shall be liable to be indicted, tried and punished as a principal offender.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1...nacted/en/html

TheDiceMan2020

jobbridge4life wrote: »

What we badly need is for people not to take one horrific case, no matter how horrendous, and try to use it as a tool to advance their own political agendas.

___

I'm prepared now to be down voted into oblivion.

I don't know what sad, needy impulse exists in people who won't stand up to the bully next to them, that makes them imagine they are somehow the one fool who can 'tell it like it is, and give those boys what they needed'. You wouldn't dare. You are a saddo behind a keyboard. You don't know the details of the case, you don't know the families involved. You have so much you could do right now and tomorrow to really genuinely improve the lives of all around you and lessen the chances of horrors like this happening again.

AND YOU WON'T. Because you'll be on here moaning and cribbing about judges letting people off easy and other sh!te like that. The next time there is a rape case half of you will be saying the woman basically asked to leave the accused's house bleeding and bawling because 'sure didn't she go in, in the first place'.

Disgusting. Repulsive and pathetic.

Reported for personal abuse. And your posting on here, concerned only with those two pieces of ****, says everything we need to know about you.

flos1964

Will I Am Not wrote: »

React like what? I’m saying bollox to the idea that a whole village should feel guilty over this.

Its only an old saying...i did not mean every body and i am certainly not advocating a return to the valley of the squinting windows type community but come on somebody could have helped the kid and her parents but you take what you want from it.

Dante7

Dante7 wrote: »

Boy B's lawyers went to court today to get an injunction to have the photos and names removed from social media.

What disgusts me even further (if that was possible) is the knowledge that we the taxpayers are more than likely paying to protect the identity of this scumbag.


Can be sure they are on free legal aid

Gimme A Pound

I wouldn't care if their anonymity were lifted but it can't be so it shouldn't be by people who think they're above the law.

Also, while calls for execution here on Boards from anonymous accounts don't mean sh1t, in the real world people with pitch forks who'll be out to get the families (**** that dad but what about the rest of them? And that kid with the same name. And school staff) could hurt people undeserving. And many of them are just in it for the drama and excitement too.

jobbridge4life wrote: »

What we badly need is for people not to take one horrific case, no matter how horrendous, and try to use it as a tool to advance their own political agendas.

___

I'm prepared now to be down voted into oblivion.

I don't know what sad, needy impulse exists in people who won't stand up to the bully next to them, that makes them imagine they are somehow the one fool who can 'tell it like it is, and give those boys what they needed'. You wouldn't dare. You are a saddo behind a keyboard. You don't know the details of the case, you don't know the families involved. You have so much you could do right now and tomorrow to really genuinely improve the lives of all around you and lessen the chances of horrors like this happening again.

AND YOU WON'T. Because you'll be on here moaning and cribbing about judges letting people off easy and other sh!te like that. The next time there is a rape case half of you will be saying the woman basically asked to leave the accused's house bleeding and bawling because 'sure didn't she go in, in the first place'.

Disgusting. Repulsive and pathetic.

Not that I disagree with everything you say, but we do know at least *some* of the details of the case.

secman

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Are there honestly people so dumb, so dim, so dull as to not to have ever heard of the many, multiple miscarriages of justice based on eye witness testimony?

Are we to forever have to tolerate this ignorant grunts as equally valid opinions?

To even suggest or associate a miscarriage of justice with this case would involve both dimness and dumbness, those 2 boys were uo to their neck in it, it was both planned and unfortunately executed, how neither of the families sought to close the trial down by way of a guilty plead is beyond me. Not a bit of remorse was shown by either of those evil cowards, nor by their families. On the otherhand the parents of Anna were a class apart with their handling of the whole trial and the horrific evidence they had to watch and endure.
Lots of people in Leixlip knows who they are, it spread around school like wildfire once they were lifted.
Miscarriage my arse....

STB.

Stheno wrote: »

The laws around naming children? Were they not in affect from 2001? I may well be mistaken about that

This has come up several times in the thread. Naming - why they weren't named, will they ever be if they are released.

Strangely there have been cases before in Ireland where the murderer was named at the time despite being a minor. I don't know why in that case. The Criminal Justice Act made amendments to the Childrens Act in 2006 so perhaps it was before it. In any event he was named at the time and again when he was released 12 years later (Darren Goodwin).

The Journal claims that the gagging order remains indefinitely for the two found guilty today, even after they reach 18 and are eventually released.

I believe that only a Judge can release the gag on naming if he/she believes it is the public interest to do so.

The_Brood

So unless I am missing something, the Irish state is fully supportive and defending rapists and murderers by protecting their identities. How is this any better than the most backwards dictatorships on earth? How is this any better than Saudi Arabia or North Korea?

Will I Am Not

flos1964 wrote: »

Its only an old saying...i did not mean every body and i am certainly not advocating a return to the valley of the squinting windows type community but come on somebody could have helped the kid and her parents but you take what you want from it.

I know the saying and I’m sure there are some people that could have done something but you said “Well that village can collectively hold their heads in shame tonight”. I just thought that a bit out of order as I’m sure many people from the area are reading this thread.

Spanish Eyes

TBH if I were the parent of a murdered child and knew who did it as a protected minor, I would sing it out loud and take the consequences of revealing the identity of that minor. I doubt there would be any consequences really.

Could anything be worse than losing your lovely child. No nothing could. Ever.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Are there honestly people so dumb, so dim, so dull as to not to have ever heard of the many, multiple miscarriages of justice based on eye witness testimony?

Are we to forever have to tolerate this ignorant grunts as equally valid opinions?

Are you really claiming a miscarriage of justice in this case?

Also b wasn’t found guilty on the basis of eye witness testimony alone.

BarryD2

Grayson wrote: »

Anything that would enable you to identify them. Saying a person is from a large town doesn't help you identify the person. The same goes for a school. naming a family member greatly reduces the number of possibilities.

Be interesting to see how far that can be pushed. It seems to be a bit of a grey area, would require a subjective judgement as to what could be published.

Beechwoodspark

So in my line of work I go from town to village to town around Leinster

Today at approx 10 am two names were mentioned to me by a shop manager

Both names were correct - I know this cuz a close friend informed me of the names last year. He lives very near the scene of the awful crime.

The names were mentioned to me in a small village in Westmeath also around 4.

My point is that the names and families even addresses are common knowledge now.

Grayson

The_Brood wrote: »

So unless I am missing something, the Irish state is fully supportive and defending rapists and murderers by protecting their identities. How is this any better than the most backwards dictatorships on earth? How is this any better than Saudi Arabia or North Korea?

I can't see how this turns us into Saudi or North Korea. Please explain.

flos1964

Will I Am Not wrote: »

I know the saying and I’m sure there are some people that could have done something but you said “Well that village can collectively hold their heads in shame tonight”. I just thought that a bit out of order as I’m sure many people from the area are reading this thread.

Ok as its not really a village in the old fashioned sense i meant the school...the parents and those who knew the family but ill take that...sorry.

Pawwed Rig

Boom_Bap wrote: »

It's the fact that there is no forensic evidence that is the kicker for me. Why is there none although he was there and admitted to being there. Where are his clothes he was wearing on the day? There is always forensic evidence from a scene like that. And the boy was certainly in contact with her that day.

Did they not find blood on his shoes? The clothes were washed innocently by the parents.

veryangryman

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

So in my line of work I go from town to village to town around Leinster

Today at approx 10 am two names were mentioned to me by a shop manager

Both names were correct - I know this cuz a close friend informed me of the names last year. He lives very near the scene of the awful crime.

The names were mentioned to me in a small village in Westmeath also around 4.

My point is that the names and families even addresses are common knowledge now.

Good.

tuxy

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Did they not find blood on his shoes? The clothes were washed innocently by the parents.

No you're confusing it with what they found on Boy A's shoes and clothes.

Damien360

tuxy wrote: »

No you're confusing it with what they found on Boy A's shoes and clothes.

The Irish times did a very good piece yesterday online about this. There is no evidence against Boy B other than his admissions in Garda interviews. If he kept his mouth shut, it is likely he would never have been charged.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Damien360 wrote: »

The Irish times did a very good piece yesterday online about this. There is no evidence against Boy B other than his admissions in Garda interviews. If he kept his mouth shut, it is likely he would never have been charged.

He would definitely be charged with something. Obstruction at the least.

Boom_Bap

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Did they not find blood on his shoes? The clothes were washed innocently by the parents.

That was Boy A, and I do question whether they were innocently washed and how could blood stained clothes be innocently washed.
The shoes were also cleaned, but not to full remove blood spatter.

SirChenjin

Boom_Bap wrote: »

That was Boy A, and I do question whether they were innocently washed and how could blood stained clothes be innocently washed.
The shoes were also cleaned, but not to full remove blood spatter.

He claimed to have been beaten up so I suppose the parents at that point believed him and so the clothes were washed.

jobbridge4life

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

The boy was found guilty, unanimously, by a jury.

Like it or not, that's the law.

Agreed. No question on that. Similarly it is unquestionably the law that the convicteds’ identity be concealed.

riffmongous

Damien360 wrote: »

The Irish times did a very good piece yesterday online about this. There is no evidence against Boy B other than his admissions in Garda interviews. If he kept his mouth shut, it is likely he would never have been charged.

That's actually what occurred to me reading it too... He seemed almost too clever for his own good trying to explain everything and didn't realise at some point he'd gone too far.. if he'd shut up and just refused to say anything more he probably would have got away with it, good enough for the scum to be done in by his own arrogance