the criminal mind

I should be doing my thesis writing up and/or study for next week's class right now, but this just felt right.

Nurin Jazlin's parents face the possibility of being sued. Or so I read. I totally agree with her point that 'we can sue any parents, then, whenever we see any child walking alone'. Thing is, I'm looking at it this way; was there a likelihood that the killer(s) have been stalking Nurin for quite a while (and noticed that the parents are, well, negligent)? I say this must be investigated and proven first, before anyone can prove that the parents've been negligent. Chances are, the killer(s) went to the Wangsa Maju/Kampung Baru area with the notion that 'at these places the security is low' rather than 'there are lots of negligent parents in these areas' or 'I know a kid here (Nurin) whose parents are negligent'. In other words, I believe it to be more a crime of chance rather than a planned one (meaning, the killer(s) was/were looking for any child who was alone, rather than targetting Nurin from the start). And who is responsible for security, if I may ask? Are they not the very same people wanting to prosecute Nurin's parents?

My take on this -and it might very well be flawed but I couldn't care less- is that if the police are to prosecute the parents, they must get the killer(s) first. So in any way, that's what they must be doing, regardless of whether or not Nurin's parents were guilty of negligence. So if you had to prosecute the parents, why don't you stop wasting your resources to build a case against them. Instead, go catch the killer(s) first, why don't you? Please?