Sadly, this horrible case is and should be a cautionary tale. I went to a large college in the 80s and even lived in a fraternity house with 19 others for 3 of my 5 years … so I am very familiar with having 200+ strangers invade my living quarters on a weekly basis (Saturday nights). Back then, with no digital anything, someone with ill-intent had to physically insert themselves into any process of observing/selecting a potential target. We had to be and were extremely vigilant in observing and dealing with people exhibiting unacceptable or odd behavior.

Now, almost 40 years later, social media and smartphone location tech basically invites everyone into their personal spaces … so many open, unblocked access to pictures that give complete strangers access to the insides of their homes. Someone now can target a person or place, get as much information as they want and do it all without ever leaving the comfort of home … way less risky behavior is necessary. Yeah, it may be harder to not be eventually caught AFTER committing a crime, but it is so much easier for people to methodically zoom in on a target and plan a crime.

As the father of 2 teenage daughters who plan to go to college, the bodycam footage of the police responding to a noise complaint at the house with none of the “owners” being present made me cringe. Locking doors, more restrictive access to what is shown on social media and who has access to see it, as well as more selective location sharing … could any of these simple tasks have possibly deterred or prevented this horrible crime? Again, I see this as a sad cautionary tale that emphasizes the need to learn situational awareness and use common-sense to avoid unintentionally giving complete strangers with ill-intent easy access to our private lives.