If I am the target of that caustic tone, I fear you are about to dial a disconnected line. I know you are keen to help, so let me help you understand my position, espoused many times on this thread. I do not believe they were in any way involved with the disappearance of their daughter. I do believe they were negligent in their duty of care towards their children (all of them- regardless of the consequential outcome of each) given full consideration of the facts surrounding the case. On this I think we agree. I don't believe retributive punishment for those actions serves any purpose and that is no reflection of their employment or perceived class. I have not sat on any fence.
I would contend that most debates, including this one, are not binary. I would further add that I have complete contempt for the view that the popular inclination of society at a particular point in time can be an arbiter of the reasons someone ought to act in a particular way; with this type of relativism any action can be justified. Their actions, I believe, were in breach of their duty of care to their children- but not because 'society says' so.