No, I am not. But mystery murders almost always involved public property to one degree or another.
Why would the owners of a shopping mall necessarily be interested in pursuing the murderer of a stranger?
Aside from the possibility that their actions might be discovered, malls want to be safe and pleasant places for their customers. This is a sign of serious problems, is it not?
Suppose the owners of the shopping mall did decide to pursue the murderer. How much would it cost them to hire their own private investigator to do the job?
Far less than it costs to get the police to do the same thing. Police are bureaucrats who spend almost all their time writing down what happened. Like all bureaucrats, they work inefficiently and stupidly. I was recently arrested on a trumped-up assault charge (later dropped). It would have been laughable to see the amount of useless activity, except for the detail that they were doing it to me.
I would also assume that mall owners would have insurance against this kind of thing, as a matter of course. Which would spread the cost around among all mall owners.
Not to fully investigate a murder. They just want the body off the property as quickly and quietly as possible, and they only want the perpetrator identified to make sure he doesn't come back. "Justice" doesn't enter into it under your proposed system.
ONLY if you consider the Police Department to be "public property". DoJ stats say that 73% of violent crime occurs in the home with 86% associated with the family or families that reside there. Get some REAL facts witll you, not something that is a mixture of the "legalize pot" and the Harry Browne Libratarian diatribe.
Semper Fi
Whoa hoss, you can't have it both ways. Insurance, in an "outside the box" anarchic society???? Perish and forbid. You should carefully frame your utopia, p[ublish it then come back and frame your arguements against your baseline, you are WAYYYYY out there in this comparison to anarchy.
Semper Reality