{"title":"The killing and thereafter: intimate partner homicides in a process perspective, part II","authors":"Viveka Enander, G. Krantz, S. Lövestad, K. Örmon","doi":"10.1332/239868021x16317122802413","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article puts intimate partner homicide (IPH) into a process perspective, and describes the latter two stages of the IPH process, that is, ‘changing the project’ and ‘the aftermath’. The focus of analysis is on the moment when the perpetrator chooses to kill the victim, and what s/he does and says in the wake of the killing. Fifty court files, from cases involving 40 male and 10 female perpetrators, underwent thematic analysis. Regarding the final trigger pertaining to changing the project, some situational factors that trigger male-perpetrated IPH seem to differ from the corresponding factors in female-perpetrated IPH. Feelings of rejection and jealousy seemed to be more common as triggers to kill for men than for women, while some cases of female-perpetrated IPH were linked to self-defence in response to IPV. Moreover, as noted previously, no female perpetrators displayed possessiveness.Regarding the aftermath, after the homicide the perpetrators generally contacted someone and admitted to having killed their partners. Only a few perpetrators denied culpability and even fewer, mainly male, perpetrators concealed their crimes and denied knowledge of them. However, even in cases where the perpetrator admitted to having killed their victims, their courtroom narratives were apparently constructed to minimise resposibility.Key MessagesThe IPH process can be described as threefold, consisting of the following stages: the build-up before the killing, changing the project into killing one’s partner and the aftermath to the killing. Similar triggers exist in the first two stages, and the boundaries between them are blurred, but a final trigger seems to precede the killing.IPH perpetrators may contact someone after the killing and admit to having committed it, but still attempt to minimise their responsibility.The IPH process is gendered, with different features in the respective cases of male and female perpetrators. It is often, but not always, preceded by male-to-female intimate partner violence (IPV).","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16317122802413","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
This article puts intimate partner homicide (IPH) into a process perspective, and describes the latter two stages of the IPH process, that is, ‘changing the project’ and ‘the aftermath’. The focus of analysis is on the moment when the perpetrator chooses to kill the victim, and what s/he does and says in the wake of the killing. Fifty court files, from cases involving 40 male and 10 female perpetrators, underwent thematic analysis. Regarding the final trigger pertaining to changing the project, some situational factors that trigger male-perpetrated IPH seem to differ from the corresponding factors in female-perpetrated IPH. Feelings of rejection and jealousy seemed to be more common as triggers to kill for men than for women, while some cases of female-perpetrated IPH were linked to self-defence in response to IPV. Moreover, as noted previously, no female perpetrators displayed possessiveness.Regarding the aftermath, after the homicide the perpetrators generally contacted someone and admitted to having killed their partners. Only a few perpetrators denied culpability and even fewer, mainly male, perpetrators concealed their crimes and denied knowledge of them. However, even in cases where the perpetrator admitted to having killed their victims, their courtroom narratives were apparently constructed to minimise resposibility.Key MessagesThe IPH process can be described as threefold, consisting of the following stages: the build-up before the killing, changing the project into killing one’s partner and the aftermath to the killing. Similar triggers exist in the first two stages, and the boundaries between them are blurred, but a final trigger seems to precede the killing.IPH perpetrators may contact someone after the killing and admit to having committed it, but still attempt to minimise their responsibility.The IPH process is gendered, with different features in the respective cases of male and female perpetrators. It is often, but not always, preceded by male-to-female intimate partner violence (IPV).