If it can be proven that raising a killer is both preventable, and that preventing it is within a parent (or parents') ability. Both of which are not provable. I'd say no: not a legally demonstrable charge except perhaps if the lawyer goes to an angle of negligence This seems like a basic nature v. Nurture allegation
There is definitely a lot of anger / scapegoating going on here. People always deal with death differently and want someone to blame. Unfortunately, in US culture, somehow the legal system / money has become a far too common way of placing blame. I'm sure there are circumstances where the parent does deserve real blame. But I'm hesitant to say that this it's smart to rule on these simply because it sets precedents and encourages the behavior more. There's no such thing as "case-by-case basis" in our legal system. This is where I started to reexamine my thoughts:
“My light bulb went off so fast when I heard that,” Anthony remembers. “My lawyer was next to me and I said, ‘We have to do something about that.’ If it was a learned behavior, then teach a different behavior. If you taught your son to kill, then you need to be punished, too.” But still..after all those paragraphs...I don't think the parents are truly to blame or anything positive is going to come out of blaming them, holding them accountable through $, or setting precedents for later.“There was significant history as outlined in [Justin’s psychiatric report] of domestic violence in his household when he was young. Justin also suffered abuse, physical abuse, by his father. This was learned behavior, Your Honor. Justin saw his father strangle his mother on more than one occasion. Justin has inappropriate responses to stressors as a result of his disabilities.”