[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

HE had hurt the child before and referred to her as ‘satan’ and the ‘devil’ so not exactly spur of the moment.

Her point wasn't as an excuse or to lessen the actions of this man. The point is that a lot of people seem to think that this would have been avoided "with better checks", as though there "must" have been some sign that he would do this if the people doing the checks were "better at their jobs" or "had tougher criteria". But that's rarely the case. People who pass every check going with flying colours, and seem like normal and completely non-violent people, can "turn" and commit horrible crimes.

You seem to think that there's "something that can be changed" (not allowing gay people to adopt at all, probably) that would stop things like this happening when in reality, it could be the person you least expect who commits a crime like this, and there is no such thing as a foolproof system of checks.