The results came back from the DNA test.
Traces had been left at the scene. It seemed to have been a senseless act with no apparent motivation. The victim was an elderly woman, retired, serving the community in the role of a ‘lollypop lady.’
She had been liked and respected. Trace evidence was all the detectives had to go on. They stared at the screen. It was exactly what they had been hoping for; an exact match. Now, they had a name and address. Their records showed that the male offender was not known to the police, but that no longer mattered. These cases could often be long, drawn out investigations, but not in this case. They could wrap up the murder enquiry inside of a week. There would be congratulations all round if they could make an arrest and charge the killer in such short order.
They were feeling elated about this turn of events until one of them spotted something unexpected when the offender’s full particulars came up. The date of birth showed that the DNA’s owner was only five years old!
Over the following days the tests were repeated, thoroughly, but the results came back the same. It had to be some kind of mistake. Somehow the sample had been contaminated, yet no one could figure out how it had happened. Dejected and more than a little embarrassed, the detectives went back to square one.
Meanwhile, not far away, in the quiet corner of a kindergarten playground, a young boy was perched on a plastic stool, watching the teacher supervise children on play equipment. She had also been rude to him. He was quietly planning. His plans were well advanced.
She was next.