I'm still of mixed feelings on this.

As for EB ... I hold no judgement for or against them. It's their company they can do with it what they want.


as for the mall itself, the question really is...


Would added security have stopped this from happening?

And I'm not sure it would have.


In order for security to have prevented this, they would have had to have been in or around the bathroom at the time of the attack.

Even with added security, even with the guards walking rounds, there would have been periods of time where a guard is not in/around the bathroom.

And I know this for a fact because I've done this kind of work in the Navy.

In order for "added security" to have prevented a bathroom attack you would have to station a guard at each bathroom area. In the entire mall.


And let's say the attacker is forcing the victim to be silent, to not scream... that would mean that - in order to stop the attack - the guard would have to be INSIDE the bathroom.



So is the mall at fault for not having a guard in each bathroom?
Does anyone know of ANY mall that has this?



The other option of course is much less costly, but just as effective.... The parent accompanies his or her child to the toilet.



i know the parent of the child is very upset... and that might be why the mall is being blamed...

but i also know it's easier to blame someone else than look the child in the eye and say "it was my fault. yes that man attacked you, but if i had been there you would have been safe"