This advise is a MUCH better fit on you. You are the one ready to convict somebody for murdering a child because you don't approve of their lifestyle.
Obviously, in your zeal to defend, whatever it is you are defending, you are willing to throw out proven investigative methods, logic and common sense.
Why do you think Gary Condit was questioned in the disappearance of Chandra Levy? Do you believe that his name was just pulled out a hat?
Using the same age old investigative questions, of who had motive, who had opportunity, who had discrepencies in their stories...Condit stood out like a big roach on a white tile floor.
The original premise here was not that the parents sexual lifestyle caused their child to be kidnapped, but that their sexual practices, most likely contributed to it. Don't know why you do not want to see that.