GUILTY Ireland - Anastasia Kriegel, 14, Found deceased, Lucan, Co Dublin, 14 May 2018 *minors arrested*

[KyleDeverell]

So Boy A told the witness that he was on his own in the park with Ana the day she disappeared. During the conversation the witness noticed that Boy A was injured and asked Boy A what had happened. A month later Boy B told the same witness that he went to "explore" the house with Ana and they "met" Boy A there. Boy B also described the very violent fight that Boy A and Ana got into.
The witness noticed that Boy A was not himself, was injured and was possibly one of the last people to see Ana alive. He also knew that Ana and Boy A had been seen getting into a physical fight in the same house where her body was later discovered. Boy B was also afraid that Boy A was going "to snake him" because he was the one to call to Ana's door. Yet the witness did not put any of this together.
Something like this would have rocked the place they're from and the murder and sexual assault of a fourteen year old girl would have been all that people talked about. This is in addition to all the newspaper coverage, the shock of the country and the high profile garda investigation. Somehow, incredibly the witness claimed he "forgot" about Boy B's conversation until November when the gardai contacted him. Surely he must have realized that something was very wrong and that Boy A and Boy B were heavily implicated.
How could a thirteen year old keep all this knowledge quiet based purely on a promise when Boy A and Boy B had already been arrested months earlier? You do have to wonder about the rules of the "cult" viz "not to talk about it" and "act normal like nothing happened".

 

[nothinonyou]

nothing today?

 

[Legally Bland]

nothing today?

Don't think so.

 

[KyleDeverell]

From Thursday -
"Mr Justice Paul McDermott told the jurors there would be some further short evidence from the prosecution on Tuesday morning, but that would bring the prosecution case to an end."
The same link gives more information on the other witnesses called including a girl who said that Ana told her in September 2017 that she liked Boy A. There is more evidence on the "cult" and it seemed to be that Boy B was the leader. There is also a witness as to the tape used on Ana and how specialized it. An analyst from the Gardai was called about Ana and Boy A's phones.
Kriegél trial: Boy B believed he was being set-up

 

[KyleDeverell]

Boy B's father said his son "was "very naïve", "very immature" and was "hungry for friendship". He also asked "Boy B why he had not come to him. ... Boy B told him he was afraid of Boy A as he had "lots of power"". Boy B also said to his father "he didn't respect him and didn't want to share his truths with him".

The prosecution case has now closed against the two accused and the jury has been told to return on Thursday morning.

Ana Kriegel murder trial: Dad of Boy B says his son didn't tell him full story at beginning as he 'couldn't believe it' - Independent.ie

More details from the RTE website
Boy's father tells court of shock over Kriégel tragedy

 

[molly67]

Mr. Grehan has now closed his case. BOY A’s barrister has already told the court he wasn't calling evidence, while counsel for BOY B said there was an issue to be resolved.

Prosecution Finishes Calling Evidence In Ana Kriegel Trial | TodayFM

Does this mean we are nearing the end of the trial ?

 

[nothinonyou]

Read that on Thursday they will go to the "next phase" of the trial... whatever that means?

Also, "sharing your truth" is a very American phrase, just doesn't sound like something an Irish person would say.

 

[molly67]

Posted twice

 

[molly67]

Read that on Thursday they will go to the "next phase" of the trial... whatever that means?

Also, "sharing your truth" is a very American phrase, just doesn't sound like something an Irish person would say.

thought that was a strange turn of phrase too.

Just wondering why the jury didn't get to see/hear boy A's police interviews.

There is probably a reason and perhaps one of you could share you thoughts.

Just back from picking up my 15 year old from that park ..
.... I used to love it there (it is such a beautiful and tranquil park) .. now all I think of is poor Ana

 

[Electric Sheep]

Next phase might be Boy B's Counsel presenting a defence? I'm not surprised Boy A's Counsel is not presenting any defence, there is really nothing he can say to counter the forensic evidence.

I can't shake a gut feeling that Boy B was the mastermind in this. I wonder if more details will be released after the trial is over.

 

[molly67]

Next phase might be Boy B's Counsel presenting a defence? I'm not surprised Boy A's Counsel is not presenting any defence, there is really nothing he can say to counter the forensic evidence.

I can't shake a gut feeling that Boy B was the mastermind in this. I wonder if more details will be released after the trial is over.

I got the feeling B's defence just wanted to clear up something ..
I didn't get the feeling they were going to be presenting much defence.

I have to say my gut feeling is B is the brains behind it all - after seeing what he seen and calmly spoke to his guidance teacher in the manner he did .... just not normal whether he is a child or adult.

 

[mrjitty]

thought that was a strange turn of phrase too.

Just wondering why the jury didn't get to see/hear boy A's police interviews.

There is probably a reason and perhaps one of you could share you thoughts.

Just back from picking up my 15 year old from that park ..
.... I used to love it there (it is such a beautiful and tranquil park) .. now all I think of is poor Ana

Did boy A do any formal interviews?

Iirc he was arrested on suspicion of murder early on so probably has said nothing

Boy b has tried to talk himself out of trouble and but had rather the opposite result

 

[KyleDeverell]

I found the father's language rather odd too. He says he wanted Boy B to "grow as a man" but Boy B was not "open to him" and didn't want "to share the truth with him". He admitted his son didn't trust him and wouldn't tell him of the events leading up to the murder. Yet he knows that his son is "incapable of murder".

The father said Boy B liked "puzzles, Lego, cartoons, transformers and pokeman cards. He wasn't into sports or "fights" but conceded he did like "bows, arrows and spears". A witness said Boy B had hammers and weapons which he had fashioned out of sticks and rocks. This would appear to contradict the father's assertion that Boy B was not into fights.

The father said that Boy B tended to believe everything his friends said, that he was immature and naive. Yet to gardai Boy B "immediately showed himself to be a remarkably intelligent young man". Boy B had precise timings ready when questioned the next day which Det. Garda Roantree found odd. This impression of Boy B being intelligent is backed up by the career guidance counselor who said she was "impressed by Boy B" who seemed "a very bright boy". His speech flowed and he seemed calm and looked her in eye when speaking of Ana after she had been found. He was more annoyed at being dragged into this "mess" because of Boy A" - there is no sense of horror or revulsion or remorse.

Boy B's father said his son was afraid of Boy A but a witness said that he thought Boy B to be the leader when it came to the Satanic cult and he was the less affected of the two the day after. Boy B certainly wasn't afraid of the guards or the long interview processes in the station. When the gardai were on the verge of making a breakthrough he asked for a break as he realized what was happening. He was thinking ahead and scheming, always ready when presented with facts that contradicted his story.

He didn't have any respect for Ana even in death. He said she was a weirdo, her clothing slutty and no one liked her. All this points to a very different person to the father's portrayal of a guileless and naive son incapable of murder. More importantly, why wasn't the mother the person to testify that her son is incapable of murder? After all she was the one who sat in on the interviews?

I'm not sure why the prosecution called Boy B's father - I don't see how he adds anything. Because of the way the prosecution has mounted the case, Boy A is a blurry character. Boy B's father intimates he is a Machiavellian character schooled in the martial arts operating in the shade and manipulating his son. I'm sure the strategy of the prosecution will become clearer when all this is over but I sincerely hope that the defence does not rely too heavily on a character assassination of Ana. I cannot see how it is completely avoidable but her parents have been through enough.

 

[mrjitty]

The state is under a duty to place all the relevant evidence before the Court.

Boy Bs father is a direct witness to key events after the murder.

 

[KyleDeverell]

"Neither of the two boys accused of the murder of 14-year-old Ana Kriégel are calling evidence in their own defence."
Ana Kriégel murder trial: Boys will not call evidence in their defence

 

[Legally Bland]

Prosecuting counsel Brendan Grehan is making his closing address to the jury.

He will be followed by Senior Counsel Patrick Gageby for Boy A and then Senior Counsel Damien Colgan for Boy B.

They will then be addressed by Mr Justice McDermott who will sum up the evidence and outline the legal parameters within which they must come to a decision.

Closing speeches under way in Kriégel trial

 

[KyleDeverell]

"Counsel said Ana “craved friendship”. This made her very vulnerable to someone who wanted to take advantage of it. This was the reason the jury heard evidence of Ana’s loneliness at the beginning of the trial, Mr Grehan said."
This makes for some sad reading
Ana Kriégel ‘over the moon’ to meet boy accused of killing her, trial hears

 

[KyleDeverell]

"The forensic evidence against one of the boys accused of Ana Kriegel's murder is "overwhelming" and the other accused's account of what happened is "not credible", a barrister has told a jury at the Central Criminal Court."

Re Boy B "Mr Grehan added: "A large amount of that were lies, untruths and half-truths." He said that Boy B "assisted the killer of Ana Kriegel" and in particular he "assisted and played a vital role in bringing Ana to the location where she was killed.""
Ana Kriegel trial: Forensic evidence against Boy A 'overwhelming', claims Prosecution in closing speech

 

[KyleDeverell]

"Mr Grehan said Boy B knew there was "no romantic interlude coming" when he called to Ana's house to tell her Boy A wanted to see her".
"He was present, Mr Grehan said, when she was brought to the ground, stripped, sexually assaulted and "most likely when she was murdered". He then helped in covering up by his lies to gardaí, Mr Grehan said."
"Professor Cassidy also pointed to evidence that Ana put up a struggle but "may have been unconscious when sexually assaulted."
If Boy B admitted to being present at the start of the rape, then Professor Cassidy's evidence would strongly suggest he was there for the beatings and knew what was going to happen. Absolutely shocking.
"Mr Grehan concluded, saying Boy B's claim that he didn't know what was going to happen to Ana is, "simply unbelievable and you can safely convict him of murder"."
Ana Kriegel 'suffered very violent death where she fought for her life,' prosecution tells murder trial

 

[LaCEZ]

I have been following this case, it is horrendous. I know there is an outcry in Ireland about the details being reported daily and people wishing Anna's 'dignity' had been persevered by not reporting what happened to her. However, I feel, if it was my daughter, I would want the world to know what she suffered, down to the last detail, what these monsters put her through, I don't feel her dignity has been impacted at all by detailing publicly what she suffered through. She fought long and hard for her life and Boy A's injuries show how tough she was and how hard she fought back, even if she was not able to save herself. I do wonder if Boy B assisted in overpowering her, even if there is no forensic evidence to link him to it. There will be an outcry in Ireland if these monsters get a light sentence.
I wonder why none of Boy A's interviews were shown to the jury? any ideas? is it because the forensic evidence is so conclusive and they want to keep the focus on Boy B's interiviews. Hard to believe a 13 year old could lie so confidently on so many occasions, I am sure his parents, his solicitor and of course the police were persistently encouraging him to tell the truth. I also am shocked they are on bail, I expected they would be in Oberstown on remand.