I often see posts that rule out an option based on the risk that the perp is taking. These individuals have most likely have had a habit of risk-taking behaviors throughout their lives. Many of the more well-known cases of child abduction where the child was found and the perp charged and prosecuted (ie Amber Dubois, Victoria Stafford, Sandra Cantu, Adam Walsh, etc.) involved perps who took high risks by abducting children from public places and/or well traveled streets. They were just seconds away from being seen by a witness. Risk level does not seem to be a factor that seems to place highly in whether or not a child can or will be abducted.
Some children were abducted from their own homes with a family member sleeping in another room (ie Polly Klaas, Jessica Lundsford.) These were crimes of opportunity with high risk involved. IMO the question shouldn't be "why would he/she risk it?", but "how could it be done, considering the risks involved?"
How many cases of almost abductions have ended with the perp running away and never being caught or charged? I would imagine there are probably a lot of failed attempts before the perp actually succeeds at his/her crime.
These sickos don't think like a normal person "What if I get caught?" but think instead "How can I get away with this?."
:goodpost: