But the record of captures and releases in the case of convicted assailant David Lubina, wanted as prime suspect in the Sept. 13 fatal shooting of Nova TV editor Michal Velíšek, is truly onerous.

Ordinary citizens, not the police, captured and disarmed Lubina not once but twice after he menaced people in public places. Both times the authorities let him go, apparently deeming him to be no serious threat to society.

Only five days before Lubina was seen at Karlovo náměstí, where witnesses say he was waving a gun, threatening a woman as Velíšek tried to intervene, passengers on a tram had jumped him for doing the same thing. They managed to get the gun away from him and hand him over to police.

The gun turned out to be a compressed-air pistol, but it's doubtful whether any of the passengers who took action to protect themselves from Lubina could have known that. In any case, after failing to make his point on the tram Sept. 8, thanks to a doctor at the Bohnice psychiatric clinic, Lubina was free to try his luck again Sept. 13 — this time with a real gun.

A state doctor for a psychiatric clinic explains the criteria doctors use to determine when to release a locked-down inmate with a history of violence: "If the case involves a mental defect, the patient is released if he proves not to be dangerous to himself or others. In order to be able to do so, the patient has to pass psychological tests. The next level is a conversation with a psychologist, who knows the patient and his medical history.

"Even if the patient is an anomalous personality with, for example, aggressive inclinations, he can be released from the clinic if he poses no real danger — this sort of defect is not considered to be a diagnosis that requires hospitalization. It is considered to be a 'permanent personal characteristic' that can be dealt with once the person does harm. Moreover, the patient has to agree with the treatment, which he does not always do."

The good doctor should be nominated for the understatement of the year.

Who is making the determinations that inmates are not dangerous? What are the psychological tests used? Could there be an economic factor, such as overcrowded psychiatric wards where keeping someone prisoner costs the state real money?

Whatever the answers, it's clear the system broke down in the case of Lubina, costing a heroic man his life, and cheating his wife and family of a future with him.

Psychiatrists, and for that matter, judges, are not psychic. They cannot be expected to accurately predict in every case who is a real threat to society and merits indeterminate incarceration.

But when the indicators of predatory behavior are this clear and consistent — and when a record of criminal violence stretches back over eight years — it's clear the state is not paying close enough attention.