Intimate partner homicide
A study on the epidemiology of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands during 2009-2014
Name: Inge de Jong Student number: 1179209
Master thesis: Crisis and Security Management Capstone: Intimate partner homicide
Thesis supervisor: Dr. M.C.A. Liem Second reader: Dr. E. Devroe Word count: 11034
1 ‘I pray you, do not fall in love with me, for I am falser than vows made in wine’
2 Abstract
Intimate partner homicide is a phenomenon which occurs all over the world. However, not many studies have researched intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands. Therefore, the aim of this study is to note the epidemiology of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands during 2009-2014. The Elsevier homicide lists, news articles, police data and court files are used in this research to collect data about intimate partner homicide. The coding manual of Granath et al. was used to gather information on case characteristics, the victims and the perpetrators (2011). The first results show that here have been 168 cases of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands during 2009-2014. The rate of intimate partner homicides per 100.000 inhabitants fluctuates from 0.11-0.23 in the aforementioned period. 86% of the principal perpetrators were male and the modus operandi that was used most often was the knife or other sharp object/weapon. The average age of principal victims was 41 years and 43 years for the principal perpetrators. One of the motives for male perpetrators to commit homicide on their (former) female intimate partner is separation. The conclusion from this study can be drawn that there is a decline of intimate partner homicide, but it is significant enough to study intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands. The findings do mostly correspond with previous studies in the Netherlands and other (European) countries.
3
1
Introduction
Intimate partner violence, whether it be physical, emotional or sexual violence, might eventually result in intimate partner homicide (Devries et al., 2013; Daly & Wilson, 1988). Studies show that intimate partner homicide counts for a considerable proportion of all murders (Block & Christakos, 1995; Stöckl, et al., 2013).
Intimate partner homicide takes place in every part of the world and the Netherlands is no exception to this phenomenon. There is data available on how often intimate partner homicides occurred in the Netherlands during a specific period, but recent years have not been researched and therefore this study focuses on intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands during 2009-2014. For this reason the research question posed in this study is:
‘What is the epidemiology of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands, during the period 2009-2014?’
1.1 Defining intimate partner homicide
This study uses the definition that is used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Breiding, Basile, Smith, Black & Mahendra, 2015). An intimate partner is someone who has a close personal relationship that may be characterized by the partners’ emotional connectedness, they may have regular contact, ongoing physical contact and sexual behavior. They have an identity as a couple and know about each other’s lives. However, the relationship does not need to involve all the dimensions. Intimate partners can be current partners, but also former partners: - spouses (married spouses, common-law spouse, civil union spouses and domestic partners) - boyfriends/girlfriends
- dating partners
- ongoing sexual partners
The intimate partners can be from the opposite sex or the same sex (Breiding et al., 2015).
1.2 Scientific relevance
Intimate partner homicide is a field deprived of theory. The self-defense theory and the male proprietariness theory were founded a few decades ago (Walker, 1992; Daly & Wilson, 1988). These theories might be outdated and were not focused on intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands. So far, only a handful of studies have addressed intimate partner homicide in the
4
Netherlands and a current, up-to-date overview of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands is lacking. It is essential to gather data to gain insights in the mechanism of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands. Up-to-date data would make comparisons with existing theory and literature possible. The relevance of this study is therefore not only to gain knowledge, but also to gain insights into the mechanisms of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands. This study can form the basis for a theory that is focused on intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands.
1.3 Societal relevance
This study sheds some light on one of the worst crimes; the (intentional) killing of one human being by another, especially the killing of an (former) intimate partner. In some court cases where a (former) partner killed his/her partner, the judge added in the (online) judgements that the victim should have been safe around their (former) intimate partner and/or at the crime scene where the homicide took place.1 People who are/were in a relationship should not fear for their life around their (former) intimate partner. By improving the understanding and the epidemiology of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands, governments, organizations and people could set up a strategic tool based on the findings of this study.
Homicides in general can contribute to a feeling of insecurity (UNODC, 2013). (Intentional) homicide does not only create a climate of fear, but also victimizes the family and community of the victims (UNODC, 2013). Therefore this study aims to shed light on intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands and the findings may be used in some (prevention) policies. Thus this study can be an asset for a safer society.
1 Inter alia: http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2015:6395 http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBZLY:2010:BM7349 http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2015:9025&keyword=13%2f650809 http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2014:3930
5
2
Previous research
2.1 Intimate partner homicide
Intimate partner homicide occurs between two individuals who are/were in an intimate relationship with each other (Swatt & He, 2006). There are different types of intimate relationships: non marital cohabitation, common law marriages, divorced couples and dating relationships (Block & Christakos, 1995; Gauthier & Bankston, 1997). The perpetrator can be male, but it is also likely that the female is the perpetrator (Schwartz & Steffensmeier, 2008). As stated in the introduction, intimate partner violence might end up in intimate partner homicide (Devries et al., 2013; Daly & Wilson, 1988). However, this does not imply that in every case of intimate partner homicide there was some form of violence in the relationship before the crime was committed.
One in seven homicides (13,5%) are committed by an intimate partner (Stöckl, et al., 2013). The study of Stöckl et al. concludes that especially women’s main risk of homicide is from an intimate partner. The estimates between different countries ranges from a third to almost half of the homicides of women being perpetrated by an intimate partner (2013). The average age of intimate partner homicide victims was 38.5 years in the United States, including 16 states, during 2003-2009 (Smith, Fowler & Nlolon, 2014).
Intimate partner homicide ranges from an average of 14.92 to 19.42 percent of all homicide in 18 high-income countries during 1990 till 2011 (Stöckl et al., 2013). Most studies note the percentage of intimate partner homicide in their researched country/area, but do not mention the rate per 100.000 inhabitant. While the rate per 100.000 is more accurate to compare and therefore only studies which mentioned a rate are noted in table 1.
2.2 Motives
Male sexual jealousy and male sexual proprietariness are often cited as the cause of killing (former) female partners (Daly & Wilson, 1988; Goussinky & Yassour-Borochowitz, 2012; Serran & Firestone, 2004; Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007). Daly and Wilson suggest that men purchase their wives as a productive and reproductive capacity. Problems arise when men have the desire to control their women and their reproductive capacities. Proprietary men do not only see their partner as exclusive, they also have some feelings of entitlement. Threats to kill and terrorizing their women is a way to keep them under the husband’s control (Polk & Ranson, 1991; Daly & Wilson, 1988). (Sexual) jealousy appears to be one of the main motives to commit
6 Table 1 Intimate homicide rate per 100.000 inhabitants
Author(s) Rate per 100.000 N Year Country
Leth 0,2 36 1983-2007 (Southern) Denmark
Rying 0,36 - 2001 Sweden
Granath et al. 0,28* 92 2003-2006 Sweden
Granath et al. 0,56* 112 2003-2006 Finland
Corradi & Stöckl 0,2** 115 2011 England and Wales
Corradi & Stöckl 0,07** 56 2012 Germany
Statistics Canada 0,24 - 2013 Canada
Statistics Canada 0,28 - 2014 Canada
Rate per 100.000 women above the age of 14
Corradi & Stöckl 0,52 - 2006 France
Corradi & Stöckl 0,94 - 2006 Finland
Corradi & Stöckl 0,34 - 2006 Slovenia
Corradi & Stöckl 0,37 - 2006 Italy
Rate per 100.000 inhabitants in the Netherlands
Bijleveld; Smit &
Nieuwbeerta 0,27* 38 1998 The Netherlands
Smit & Nieuwbeerta 0,25** 40 2002 The Netherlands
Smit & Nieuwbeerta 0,3** 49 2003 The Netherlands
Smit & Nieuwbeerta 0,25** 40 2004 The Netherlands
Granath et al. 0,3* 152 2003-2006 The Netherlands
* The homicide rate for all homicides was known. The rate of intimate partner homicide was calculated with the use of the homicide rate (N) and the intimate partner homicide (N). ** The number of intimate partner homicides (N) was known and the rate was calculated with numbers of the Centraal Bureau Statistiek, Office for National Statistics and Destatis, Statistisches Bundesamt.
intimate partner homicide (Leth, 2009; Serran & Firestone, 2004; Wilson & Daly, 1994). Estrangement can motivate possessive men to kill their (former) female partner (Serran & Firestone, 2004; Block & Christakos, 1995). The study of Goussinky and Yassour-Borochowitz shows that in many cases of intimate partner homicide where the victim was a female, it was in the course of a break-up or against the background of the woman’s intention to end the relationship (2012). The proprietariness theory received some criticism. The proprietariness theory often fails to implicate factors such as personality, stressful events, social support and family background. However, this theory offers valuable insights into the phenomenon of men killing their (former) intimate partners (Serran & Firestone, 2004).
7
The self-defense theory implicates that female perpetrators tend to kill their partner because of self-defense or the protection of a child (Walker, 1992; Gauthier & Bankston, 1997). The female-perpetrated intimate homicide incidents can be an explosive release of aggression toward a chronically abusive intimate partner (Bannister, 1991; Block, 1990; Swatt & He, 2006). These women respond as victims of violence and kill to protect themselves (Walker, 1979). The criticism of the self-defense theory is that samples are often small and not necessarily representative (Serran & Firestone, 2004).
2.3 Correlations of intimate partner homicide
Alcohol
Some researchers found a direct correlation between alcohol accessibility and crime, particularly crime that is related to homicide. Other researchers did not find a direct correlation between crime and alcohol. However, many studies do suggest that the consumption of alcohol is related to many lethal crimes (Gyimah-Brempong & Racine, 2006; Hiroeh, Appleby, Mortensen & Dunn, 2001; Roberts, 2009). In a Finnish study they found that 60% of the intimate partner homicide perpetrators were intoxicated at the time of the crime, but Finland does have a relatively high alcohol consumption rate (Weizmann-Henelius et al., 2012; Ganpat et al., 2011). Frye, Manganello, Campbell, Walton-Moss and Wilt found that alcohol is a strong predictor for intimate terrorism of women, a form of intimate partner violence that is closely associated with intimate partner homicide (2006; Roberts, 2009).
Firearms
A few studies noted that there is a significant relationship between firearms and lethal violence and other studies concluded that firearms were used as the main modus operandi in the United States (Smith et al., 2014; Roberts, 2009; Campbell et al., 2003). An important risk factor for intimate partner homicide is gun access (Campbell, Glass, Sharps, Laughon & Bloom, 2007; Fox & Zawitz, 2007). In America, female victims are twice as likely to die from a gunshot wound as from strangling, stabbing or other methods (Roberts, 2009). However, firearms are more accessible in the United States and they therefore have higher firearm related deaths than other high-income countries (Krug, Powell & Dahlberg, 1998).
2.4 Intimate partner homicide-suicide
Intimate partner homicide is the most prevalent in cases of homicide-suicide (Liem & Roberts, 2009). Liem and Koenraadt researched intimate partner homicide followed by suicide, during
8
1992-2005 (2007). In their study they found an average of seven cases each year in the Netherlands. It is often the men who commit suicide (Barber et al, 2008; Krulewitch, 2009). Daly and Wilson speculate that men who kill their wives (and children) consider suicide due to feelings of ownership and control. They believe that the family cannot survive without him. The murder of multiple victims is almost exclusively done by men and followed by a suicidal act (Serran & Firestone, 2004; Daly & Wilson, 1998).
2.5 Prior research on intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands
Intimate partner homicide is the most common form of killing within a family (Koenraadt & Liem, 2010). Prior research in the Netherlands often was only a reconstruction of a few specific cases (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2003). However, there are three relevant studies that are discussed below.
In the years 1992-2006 there were 603 cases of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007). That is an average of 40 cases each year. However, the last five years (2002-2006) there was a decrease of intimate partner homicides (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007). De Boer concluded in his research that men are more likely to kill their partner, however female perpetrators are still significant (De Boer, 1990).
De Boer researched intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands during 1950-1980. He researched 104 men and 20 women who were held at Pieter Baan Centrum for observation (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2003). De Boer made a distinction between types of intimate partner homicide and describes four types (1990). The first type is passionate intimate partner homicide. This means that the partner tries to end the relationship. Especially men might commit intimate partner homicide at the moment the relationship is ended. Those men are strong and independent, but are terrified to lose their partner (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007). This type corresponds with the proprietariness theory of Daly and Wilson (1998). The second type is intimate partner homicide with utilitarian motives (De Boer, 1990). It is possible that a person kills their partner due to financial reasoning or that they are afraid to leave their partner for a new partner. This type does occur less than type one (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007). The third type is reactive intimate partner homicide (De Boer, 1990). The partner is abused (physically and/or sexually) for years and the homicide is the reaction at the abuse that took place for years. The reactive intimate partner homicide is almost exclusively applicable to women (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007). This is also called the battered women syndrome or the self-defense theory (Walker, 1992). The fourth type of intimate partner homicide emerges as a result of psychiatric disorder (De Boer, 1990). Some people are so disturbed that they commit homicide on their
9
partner (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007).
Nieuwbeerta & Leistra concluded in their research that men murdered their female partner often through strangulation (24%) or they used a stabbing weapon (41%). Female perpetrators who killed their male partner often use a fire weapon or a stabbing/cutting weapon (2007). Three-quarters of the intimate partner homicide took place in a private home and the average age of both the perpetrator and the victim were around the 35 years old (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007). 8% of the men and 3% of the women who killed their intimate partner committed suicide after the crime (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007). Nieuwbeerta & Leistra concluded that women commit homicide to get out of the relationship and men commit intimate partner homicide because they will never let their female partner(s) go in any circumstances (2007).
UMC Utrecht did research at parental intimate partner homicide during period 2003-2012. They researched 137 biological parents who were killed by their (former) partner (Alisic, Groot, Snetselaar, Stroeken & van de Putte, 2014). Those 137 biological parents had 257 children in total, thus 257 children were involved in 137 cases. In their research, 88% of the perpetrators were male and most homicides were committed with a stabbing weapon, 47% (Alisic et al., 2014).
Table 2 Previous research to intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands
Author(s) N Year Country
De Boer 124 * 1950-1980 The Netherlands
Nieuwbeerta and Leistra 603 1992-2006 The Netherlands Alisic, Groot, Snetselaar, Stroeken & van de Putte 137 2003-2012 The Netherlands * N is about 35% of the total intimate partner homicide during 1950-1980. There were around 350 cases.
2.6 Shortcomings of the prior research on intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands
The shortcoming of the research of De Boer is that in his research the attempts of intimate partner homicide are also included in the data (1990). In the data of this study the attempts are not included, while it is difficult to retrieve all the intimate partner homicide attempts. Another shortcoming of De Boer’s research is that he only researched women and men who were researched at the observation center in Utrecht during 1950-1980 (1990). Only the criminals that are related to a mental disorder or illness visit the observation Center in Utrecht (Liem & Roberts, 2009). Therefore he was only able to provide information on perpetrators that were held at the observation center in Utrecht who committed the crime during 1950 - 1980.
10
The shortcoming of the research of UMC Utrecht is that the research solely focused on parental intimate partner homicide, while not all intimate partner homicide victims and perpetrators are parents and therefore the research of UMC Utrecht does not provide clear data on all the intimate partner homicides that were committed during 2003-2012.
Nieuwbeerta and Leistra wrote a book about murder and manslaughter (2007). Intimate partner homicide was not their sole focus, nevertheless they did a proper first study at intimate partner homicide from 1992-2006 in the Netherlands. However, their research had a few shortcomings. They noted themselves that the motives of the principal perpetrators are not really researched and they could only make a first indication about motives and it needed more research. Besides not really researching the motives of perpetrators, they did not mention how many perpetrators attempted suicide.
2.7 Policies in the Netherlands
In the Netherlands there are no policies which are specifically targeted to prevent intimate partner homicide, but there are a few policy responses to combat domestic violence. Domestic violence might eventually result in intimate partner homicide, thus in the end these policies try to prevent intimate partner homicide. The first specific policy to combat violence against women was made in the 1980s (Roggeband, 2012). These policies included shelters and specific care services. In 2008 the government introduced the possibility to expel perpetrators of violence from their homes and impose restraining orders (Corradi & Stöckl, 2014). In 2013 State Seceretary Teeven made a proposal to limit the rights of perpetrators in contact with their child(ren), based on the study of Alisic et al. (Rijksoverheid, 2013). In the proposal Teeven states that a confrontation between the child and the perpetrator is not always in the best interest of a child. Teeven proposed that the judge decides if contact between the perpetrator and the child is in the interest of the child (Rijksoverheid, 2013). At the time of this study this proposal still had to be approved by the second and first Chamber.2
11
3
Methodology
3.1 Definition
The aim of this study is to retrieve knowledge about the epidemiology of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands from 2009 till 2014. Murder and manslaughter are called homicide in this study. Manslaughter in the Netherlands is an intended deed, but it was not intentional (article 287 and 288 WvSr.). Murder is that the crime was intended and intentional (article 289 WvSr.) (Liem, Geene & Koenraadt, 2007). Assault leading to death is not included in this study (article 302 WvSr). Attempted murder or manslaughter are also not included in the study, because it is difficult to retrieve information about all the attempted homicides. Besides the difficulty of retrieving this information, a dead body is clear proof that an incident happened. In this study the (online) judgement of judicial courts are used as the main source for defining a case as a murder or manslaughter case. If the judgement is not available, the news articles are checked to see if the news articles noted what the judgement of the court was.
3.2 Data sources
Elsevier, a weekly magazine, compiles a list of homicides each year. The Elsevier notes all the murders and cases of manslaughter that took place during a year. The lists are based on police files and ANP articles.3 ANP articles are generated by the Netherlands National News Agency (ANP) (Liem, Postulart & Nieuwbeerta, 2009). These lists form the basis for this study. The Elsevier lists were put in a dataset and all the homicides were labeled. This study researched all the homicides with the label, ‘partner killing’, ‘other familial killing’, ‘sexual killing’ or ‘unknown’. Besides the Elsevier lists, this study used an online homicide list to see if any cases were missing.4 In total there were 599 cases that needed to be researched.
The online computer database LexisNexis was used to find more information on the 599 cases. All the articles from six national newspapers are indexed in LexisNexis (Liem et al., 2009). There were a few search words used as the crime date, crime area, the name of the victim and ‘partnerdoding’ (intimate partner homicide). For all the (168) intimate partner homicide cases included in this study, articles were available at LexisNexis.
In many cases it was possible to retrieve the judgement of the court that was published online. Out of 168 cases of intimate partner homicide, 120 online judgements were available at
3 http://www.law.leidenuniv.nl/org/strafrechtencriminologie/onderzoek/murder/data.html 4 www.moordzaken.com
12
rechtspraak.nl. In thirty-four cases we were able to request court files at the courts. We got access at six different courts; ‘rechtbank Groningen, rechtbank Den Haag, rechtbank Amsterdam, rechtbank Den Bosch, rechtbank Haarlem and rechtbank Rotterdam’. If in some cases the online judgements were not found or available, newspaper articles became the only source to analyze. This was especially the case with intimate partner homicide followed by suicide (Malphurs & Cohen, 2002). If the perpetrator committed suicide, the case was only included if (a) news article(s) reported the crime and where the article(s) noted that the police confirmed that it was a case of intimate partner homicide followed by suicide.
3.2.1 News articles
The news articles used in this study are from 2009–2016 and many articles included (parts) of ANP articles. The study started with searching on LexisNexis. After LexisNexis, Google was used to search more information on. It was not possible to use only the most reliable national newspapers, because in some cases regional newspapers provided more information than the more reliable national newspapers. The newspapers and online news sites used are inter alia; Algemeen Dagblad, Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau, Amersfoortse Courant, at5.nl, barendrechtnu.nl, BN DeStem, Brabants Dagblad, dichtbij.nl, Dagblad De Limburger, Dagblad van het Noorden, De Gelderlander, De Gooi- en Eemlander, denhaagfm.nl, De Telegraaf, De Twentsche Courant Tubantia, De Stentor, de Volkskrant, 1limburg.nl, Eindhovens Dagblad, Elsevier, Haarlems Dagblad, hartvannederland.nl, Het Parool, hvzeeland.nl, IJmuider Courant, L1.nl, Leeuwarder Courant, Leidsch Dagblad, mediatv.nl, Metro, Nederlands Dagblad, Noordhollands Dagblad, NRC Handelsblad, nu.nl, Omroep Brabant, Omroep Gelderland, Omroep West, openrotterdam.nl, politie.nl, Provinciale Zeeuwse Courant, Reformatorisch Dagblad, rijnmond.nl, RTL Nieuws, rtvdrenthe.nl, rtvnh.nl, rtvnoord.nl, rtvoost.nl, rtvutercht.nl, sittard-geleen.nieuws.nl, soestercourant.nl, Spits, Trouw and unity.nu. For all 168 cases of intimate partner homicide in this study, articles on the cases are available at LexisNexis, but google was often used to retrieve extra information.
3.2.2 Police data set
A police data set was retrieved through dr. Liem. A confidentiality agreement had to be signed and the data set was only available on a secured USB stick. The USB stick was only accessible at the university. The police data set included all the registration made by the police. There was even some data available from a few decades ago, but the registration that was valuable for this study was all the registration that was made from the period 2009-2015. The data stick contains
13
information about the reports that were made by citizens, involved people, data of the crimes and addresses.
The police data is only used for the cases were not a lot of information was known. Unclear cases were checked with the police data. Around the ten cases needed extra information from the police data. The most valuable information was the name of the victim and perpetrator and the search on LexisNexis and google started with the name of the victim and/or perpetrator. Other relevant information that was provide by the police data; time of reporting, street name, age and the name of the city were the crime took place.
3.2.3 Online judgement
The online judgment was searched for all the cases in which newspaper articles mentioned a case of intimate partner homicide. The website moordzaken.com often mentioned the online judgement if there was an online judgement available. In a few cases moordzaken.com did not mention the case or the online judgement. The online judgement was searched with the use of the news articles, because some articles mentioned the date on which the judge spook the verdict and with that information it was possible to check rechtspraak.nl had the anonymized judgement of those cases. In 120 cases of intimate partner homicide the online judgement was available at rechtspraak.nl.
3.2.4 Court files
The researchers were able to request court files at the courts for 34 cases of intimate partner homicide. The 34 files were retrieved from six courts; ‘rechtbank Groningen, rechtbank Den Haag, rechtbank Amsterdam, rechtbank Den Bosch, rechtbank Haarlem and rechtbank Rotterdam’. Permission was received through dr. Liem and at the courts the guidebook of Granath, et al. was used to code all the cases by hand (2011).
3.3 Data collection
All cases of homicide in the Netherlands were derived from the Elsevier homicide lists. A new data set was made with all the homicides which were labeled with, ‘partner killing’, ‘other familial killing’, ‘sexual killing’ or ‘unknown’. The new data set in SPSS included 599 cases of homicide during the period 2009-2014. There were two researchers in this study and both took three years to research. One researcher researched 2009, 2010 and 2012, the other researcher took 2011, 2013 and 2014. For each case there was an online research and the news articles found were put together in a document. Especially articles which included confirmed
14
information of a court of the police were used in this study.
After an online research for all 599 cases, it was possible to make three different categories, cases of intimate partner homicide, not cases of intimate partner homicide and unclear cases. For all the cases of intimate partner homicide and unclear cases there was a research to find the online judgement, because the online judgement could add extra knowledge about the type of homicide. Six courts were visit to gain information on cases, these courts are located in The Hague, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Den Bosch, Groningen and Haarlem. Besides the 34 intimate partner dossiers, a few other dossiers were available, therefore it was possible to remove some unclear cases from the created dataset. All the dossiers at the courts were manually coded with the use of a coding manual (appendix A). After all those courts files, there were still a few cases which were unclear. All those cases were checked with the police data set. The police data set gave information about the name of the victim and perpetrator, age, the crime city and the street. That information made it possible to search more focused online.
In the end, all the cases that were confirmed as intimate partner homicide by the court or the police (in the cases of intimate partner homicide followed by suicide) were printed and coded with the code system of the European Homicide Monitor Guidebook (Granath, et al., 2011). After coding the 168 cases of intimate partner homicide the coded data was filled in the data system (SPSS). The 34 cases of intimate partner homicide which were coded at the courts were used to check the information that was known from the online news articles and online judgements. Often the files at the courts had additional information and that information was also put into the dataset.
Figure 1 shows that this study started with 599 cases. In 168 cases it was possible to label the homicide as intimate partner homicide. In 120 of the 168 cases anonymized online judgement was available. Out of the 168 cases of intimate partner homicide, 34 cases were available at the court.
3.4 Selection criteria
In this study only the solved cases are used. A case is seen as solved if the perpetrator and victim are known and if the police and/or the judicial courts confirmed the case as an intimate partner homicide. A few cases are still being researched by the police and judicial courts, where there are slight hints of intimate partner homicide, however there is still no conclusion about the type of homicide. Therefore, in this research these cases have not been included. Only solved cases are included to make assure that this study only includes intimate partner homicide and no other
15 Figure 1 Process of the research
16
type of homicide.
In some cases, the motive or perpetrator are unknown. Therefore it is not possible to determine if the homicide is indeed a case of intimate partner homicide or not. Thus in this research, only the cases in which there is certainty on who the perpetrator was, have been taken into account (Stöckl et al., 2013). However, it is possible that a few cases are not included in the data, because at the moment the research was conducted, the perpetrators were not known or not convicted yet (and they claimed to be innocent).
In only a few cases the principal perpetrator gave command to another person to kill their (former) intimate partner. The principal perpetrator did not commit the crime themselves, because they did not ‘pull the trigger’. However, the principal perpetrator gave the order to kill someone for them. Therefore these cases have also been included in the study.
In one case the male principal perpetrator committed homicide on a prostitute. He knew her for a half year, left his wife and visited the prostitute regularly. They have regular contact by phone and he bought several presents for her, even a car. This case is also included in the study. According to the prostitute they were not a couple, but he acted like she was his girlfriend. However, the definition of Breiding et al. also mention that ongoing sexual partners are also seen as intimate partners, and therefore this case is included in the study (2015).
3.5 Coding variables
The code manual of Granath et al. is used in this study (2011, see appendix A). There are a few variables that needed some explanation.
The variable urban or rural is indicated with data from Centraal Bureau Statistiek (CBS). The CBS collects data about inhabitants in cities and villages. The CBS calls an area urban if there are more than 1500 addresses per square kilometer. It is difficult to retrieve information on how many addresses there are per square kilometer in every city/village, therefore this study used the definition of more than 1500 people per square kilometer to call a place urban. Anything less than 1500 people per square kilometer is called rural.
This study only noted one motive, if the motive was known. Many motives are related, for example jealousy and separation, but the court files often only mentioned one motive. If there was no online judgement available, the newspaper articles were used to find the main motive. News articles sometimes mentioned different motives for the homicide. If multiple news articles mentioned the same motive, this motive was mentioned as the head motive for the perpetrator. If a newspaper only speculated about the motive, the case got the motive unknown. Therefore this study only used the head motive of the perpetrator(s), because the
17
courts often only mentioned one motive, if they mentioned a motive. The motive mental illness/psychological disorder was chosen if the (online) judgement mentioned this motive as the reason why the perpetrator committed the crime. If the perpetrator only got psychiatric care as a sanction and they got no prison sentence, the motive mental illness/psychological disorder was also chosen as a motive for the crime.
In a few cases there were a few modus operandi used during the homicide. If there was only one modus operandi that lead to the death of the victim(s), this modus was noted. In the case of multiple modus operandi the modus highest on the list was noted. The list is made by Granath et al. and its order is determined by how lethal the modus operandi is (2011).
3.6 Reliability and validity
Reliability in this study is achieved by the use of the coding manual of Granath et al. (2011). This coding manual explains the variables and secures that if someone else is doing the exact same research, the same data would be collected (Babbie, 2010). Many researched variables do not need interpretation, however some variables need interpretation. To improve the quality of the results, these variables are addressed at coding variables (3.5).
This study is descriptive and the coding manual of Granath et al. makes is possible to gather information on the epidemiology of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands (2011) and therefore the validity of this study is relatively good. The coding manual is an instrument to collect information on case, victim and perpetrator characteristics.
The use of three different type of sources, (news articles, online judgements/court files and police data) ensures the internal validity of this study (Babbie, 2010). The external validity, the possibility that conclusions can be drawn from the results and are generalizable to the real world, of this study is not really into the question (Babbie, 2010). All the intimate partner homicides during 2009-2014 are included in this study and therefore conclusions can be drawn from the results.
18
4
Operationalization
This study used the European Homicide Monitor Guidebook. All variables in table 3 are included in the coding manual of the European Homicide Monitor Guidebook. In the coding manual, 85 variables have numbers for each possible outcome (see appendix A). For example variable modus operandi; 1 = poisoning, 2 = exposure to corrosive or hot substances, 3 = hanging/strangulation/suffocation, 4 = drowning et cetera. In some cases a few variables have room for interpretation, these variables are discussed at 3.5. All cases of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands during 2009-2014 are by hand coded with the use of the guidebook. Several sources are used with the coding of the intimate partner homicide cases (see table 3). After coding manually all the cases of intimate partner homicide cases, all the codes were filled in the SPSS dataset. The 34 cases of intimate partner homicide which were available at the courts were also manually filled in and the SPSS data set was checked and completed with information received from the courts.
Table 3 Operationalization of variables*
Name Short explanation Sources**
Case
characteristics
Case characteristics about how many victims and perpetrators each year
Court files, online judgements and news articles
Victims of homicide
All victims of homicide during 2009-2014 Elsevier and moorzaken.com Rate The rate of intimate partner homicide in
het Netherlands during 2009-2014
CBS
Gender Gender of victims and perpetrators Court files, online judgements and news articles
Age of other victims
The age of non-principal victims under the 18 years
Court files, online judgements and news articles
Number of victims
Number of victims by gender Court files, online judgements and news articles
Type of homicide
Legal type of homicide Court files, online judgements and news articles
Crime scene Crime scene were the crime took place Court files, online judgements and news articles
Area Area were the crime took place CBS, Court files, online judgements, and news articles Day Crime committed on which day Court files, online judgements and
news articles
Month Month in which the crime took place Court files, online judgements and news articles
Age principal victims
Age of the principal victims Court files, online judgements and news articles
Relationship Relationship of the principal victim with the principal perpetrator
Court files, online judgements and news articles
Age principal perpetrators
Age of the principal perpetrators Court files, online judgements and news articles
19 Motive Motive of the principal perpetrator Court files, online judgements and
news articles Motive
separation and jealousy
Motive separation and jealousy of the male principal perpetrator
Court files, online judgements and news articles
Motive threatened
The motive threatened of the female principal perpetrator
Court files, online judgements and news articles
Modus operandi Modus that was used to commit the crime with
Court files, online judgements and news articles
Suicide Suicide of the principal perpetrator Court files, online judgements and news articles
Suicide by gender
Suicide of the principal perpetrator by gender
Court files, online judgements and news articles
Drinking Drinking prior the crime by the principal perpetrator
Court files, online judgements and news articles
Sanction Sanction that the principal perpetrator received for the committed crime
Court files, online judgements and news articles
* All variables are operationalized with the use of the European Homicide Monitor Guidebook. ** The sources are noted by the order of the hierarchy of the sources, based on the reliability of the sources. CBS is the most reliable source, followed by Elsevier, court files, online judgements, moordzaken.com and then the news articles.
20
5
Results
5.1 Case characteristics
In the Netherlands there were 168 cases of intimate partner homicide during 2009-2014. That is an average of 28 cases of intimate partner homicide each year. The Elsevier noted in the aforementioned period a total of 934 homicides and the victims of intimate partner homicides (187) account for 20% of all the homicides that took place during 2009-2014 in the Netherlands. This shows that in 2009-2014 in the Netherlands one in five cases was related to intimate partner homicide.
Table 4 Epidemiology intimate partner homicide, the Netherlands 2009-2014 (N=168).
Case characteristics 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 total Cases 23 38 31 31 26 19 168 Victims 26 41 38 34 28 0 187 Perpetrators 27 38 31 35 28 22 181 Number of perpetrators 1 21 38 31 29 24 18 161 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 4 1 0 0 2 0 1 4
Total number of perpetrators 27 38 31 35 28 22 181
Number of victims
1 22 36 27 29 25 18 157 2 0 1 2 1 0 1 5
3 0 1 1 1 1 0 4
4 1 0 1 0 0 0 2
Total number of victims 26 41 38 34 28 20 187
Case Breakfast
The relationship between A. (male) and B. (female) started to fall apart, therefore they would get a divorce. They both decided the night before the crime that she should keep the house and that he would find another place, thus A. slept in a hotel that night. However, together they have two children and they wanted breakfast with the whole family. When he visits his soon to be ex-wife and children, he told her that he wanted to get the house. The conversation turned into a heated argument. A. claimed in court that he felt something harsh at his back, but cannot remember what it was and what happened next. He stabbed his ex-wife 22 times, while the children were in the same room. He took the children, dropped them off with some family members and turned himself in.
21 Table 5 Homicides in the Netherlands during 2009-2014 (N=934).
Table 6 Rate of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands
Year IPH Rate*
2009 23 0,14 2010 38 0,23 2011 31 0,19 2012 31 0,19 2013 26 0,15 2014 19 0,11
* CBS statistics are used to calculate the rate of intimate partner homicides per 100.000 inhabitants in the Netherlands.
Table 7 Gender of the victims and perpetrators, the Netherlands 2009-2014 (N=168).
In the period 2009-2014 there were in total 187 victims, including 168 (former) intimate partner homicide victims. 145 principal perpetrators were men and 23 principal perpetrators were female. 138 of the 168 principal victims were women, which is 82 % of the total. 18% of the principal victims were men. Table 8 shows that 10 children below the age of 18 were also victim of intimate partner homicide. Multiple victims only occurred by male perpetrators, the female principal perpetrators only made one victim in each case. 46 cases are classified as murder, 82 cases are classified as manslaughter and in 40 cases it is unknown which legal type of homicide took place. Especially in cases of suicide it is not noted if the homicide was murder or manslaughter.
Elsevier 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 total
Victims of homicide 178 168 159 142 150 137 934
N %
Gender principal victim
Male 30 18
Female 138 82
Total 168 100
Gender principal perpetrator
Male 145 86 Female 23 14 Total 168 100 Gender perpetrator-victim Male-female 138 82 Male-male 7 4 Female-male 23 14 Female-female 0 0 Total 168 100
22 Table 8 Age of non-principal victims of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands under 18 years, 2009-2014 (N=10). N Age 4 1 6 1 8 1 9 1 11 2 15 1 16 1 17 2 Total 10
Table 9 Number of victims (N=187)
N N
Number of victims Male Female
1 134 23
2 5 0
3 4 0
4 2 0
Total 164 23
Table 10 shows that in 85% of the cases the homicide took place in a private home, where in 53% of the cases the crime took place in the private home of the victim and perpetrator. 60 % of the crimes took place in a rural area and 40% of the intimate partner homicides took place in an urban area. Sunday was the weekday on which most intimate partner homicides took place, 35 cases, and intimate partner homicide was least committed on Fridays in the Netherlands during 2009-2014. June was the month and spring the season at which most intimate partner homicides took place during the aforementioned period.
Murder; 46
Manslaugther; 82 Unknown; 40
Legal type of homicide
23 Table 10 Crime scene were the crime took place
N %
Crime scene
Private home of the victim and perpetrator 89
53 Private home of the perpetrator
12 7
Private home of the victim
41 25
Park, forest or recreational area
5 3
Street, road, public transportation or other public place 7 4
Other 14 8
Total 168 100
Table 11 Area were the crime took place
N %
Area
Urban 68 40
Rural 100 60
Figure 2 Day on which intimate partner homicide is committed, (N=168).
20 21 24 26 18 22 35 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Day
unknown, friday-Sunday
24 Figure 3 Month in which the intimate partner homicide took place (N=168).
5.2 Victim characteristics
Table 12 shows the age of the principal victims. The average age of the principal victims is 41 years. Table 13 shows the relationship that the victim had to the perpetrator. In 30% of the cases the relation that the victim had to the perpetrator was being the wife of the principal perpetrator. Only 30% of the principal victims were not in a relationship with the principal perpetrator anymore. The other 70% of the victims were still in a relationship with the principal perpetrator.
Table 12 Victim characteristics intimate partner killing in the Netherlands, 2009-2014 (N=168).
N %
Age principal victims
0-17 2 1 18-24 27 16 25-34 28 17 35-44 46 27 45-54 33 20 55-64 18 11 65+ 14 8 Total 168 100 13 15 17 10 18 21 15 12 10 15 10 12 0 5 10 15 20 25
Month
25 Table 13 Relationship of the principal victim with the principal perpetrator
N % Relationship Husband 8 4 Boyfriend 16 10 Ex-boyfriend/husband 5 3 Wife 50 30 Ex-wife 16 10 Girlfriend 42 25 Ex-girlfriend 29 17 Other 2 1 Total 168 100 5.3 Perpetrator characteristics
Table 14 shows the age of the principal perpetrators. The average age of the principal perpetrators is 43 years. The motive of the principal perpetrators are noted in table 15. Separation was the motive to commit the homicide in one third of the cases, for the male principal perpetrators 35%. In 11% of the cases jealousy was the motive for the male perpetrator to kill his (former) intimate partner. Other motive includes different type of motives. These motives are put together in other motive because of their small number. The motive threatened was for 4 women, 21%, the reason to kill their (former) intimate partner.
Table 14 Perpetrator characteristics intimate partner killing in the Netherlands, 2009-2014 (N=168).
N %
Age principal perpetrators
0-17 0 0 18-24 15 9 25-34 35 21 35-44 35 21 45-54 51 30 55-64 20 12 65+ 11 6
Unknown but over 15 years 1 1
26 Table 15 Motive of the principal perpetrator
Table 16 Motive separation and jealousy of the male principal perpetrator
Table 17 Motive threatened of the female principal perpetrator
N %
Motive of the perpetrator
Revenge 6 5
Jealousy 13 11
Separation 38 33
Triviality 7 6
Feeling threatened 5 4
Mental illnes or psychological disorder 11 10
Other motive 35 31
Total 115 100
Unknown 53 -
N %
Separation
No, other motive 62 65
Yes 34 35
Total 96 100
Motive unknown 49 -
Jealousy
No, other motive 85 89
Yes 11 11
Total 96 100
Motive unknown 49 -
N %
Threatened
No, other motive 15 79
Yes 4 21
Total 19 100
27
The modus that was used the most often by men and women was the knife or other sharp object/weapon (N=64, 41%). In thirteen cases it was unknown which modus was used and therefore these 13 cases are not shown in the graph. Hanging/strangulation/suffocation is the second modus that is used the most often (N=43, 28%). For men this was the second modus that was used the most often, in the case of the women hanging/strangulation/suffocation was the third modus that was used (N=3), while the firearm was second (N=4). The modus operandi firearm was used 22 times by the principal perpetrators (14%).
Figure 4 Modus operandi Case
Talk in the park
A. (female) had a relationship with B. for four years (male). They broke up, but he kept stalking her. She wanted to make clear that their relationship was over and decides to talk with him in a nearby park. She did not went alone to the park, because she just got into a new relationship and her boyfriend C. stayed near them, but did not join the conversation. C. brought a baseball bat with him, so they claimed in court, to protect A. against B. if that was necessary. A. and B. got in a fight and C. joined them. C. hits B. in the head with the baseball bat. After that first hit A. and C. hit B. multiple times. They left B. and later that evening they came back and found out that B was dead, they decide to bury the body. Four months later his body was found near a lake.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Other Blunt object Knife or other sharp object/weapon Smoke or fire Firearm Hanging/ strangulation/ suffocation
N
Modus operandi
28 Table 18 Suicide of the principal perpetrator
N %
Suicide of the perpetrator
No 118 70
Yes 31 19
Suicide attempt only 19 11
Total 168 100
Table 18 shows that 31 principal perpetrators committed suicide after their crime. 11% attempted to commit suicide, but did not commit suicide. Only one female committed suicide after her crime and only one woman attempted to commit suicide. 30 male principal perpetrators committed suicide, which accounts for 21% of the male principal perpetrators, while only 4% of the female perpetrators committed suicide. In 24% of the cases there were indications that the perpetrator used alcohol before the crime. Table 20 shows that in 61% of the cases the principal perpetrator was given prison sentence. 31 principal perpetrators committed suicide and thus did not receive any sanctions for their crime.
Table 19 Suicide of the principal perpetrator by gender
Table 20 Principal perpetrator drinking prior the crime
N %
Drinking
No, nothing in the case indicates this 108 76
Yes, some indications exists 14 10
Yes, there are sure indications 20 14
Total 142 100 Unknown 26 - N N Male Female Suicide No 97 21 Yes 30 1
Suicide attempt only 18 1
29 Table 21 Sanction that the principal perpetrator received for the committed crime
N %
Sanction
Perpetrator not sanctioned 31 19
Prison 99 61
Long term psychiatric care 6 4
Prison and psychiatric care (acute or long term) 27 16
Total 163 100
Unknown 5 -
Case
A new relationship
A woman and man were divorced for a few years. The woman got into a new relationship but the man mentioned in previous conversations that he would kill her if she would move on. For that reason she kept her new relationship secret for one and a half year. After one and a half year he heard about the relationship and stated that he was fine with that. However, he killed his ex-wife. In his statement he claimed that the victim willingly went with him to his house. They had an altercation and that resulted in a brawl. He hit his ex-wife at least seventeen times with a claw hammer. The woman yelled for her grandson, but he wanted to keep her quit and sealed her mound with tape. The woman suffocated through the tape.
30
6
Discussion and conclusion
6.1 Answer to the research question
The aim of this study is to note the epidemiology of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands during the period 2009-2014. Data is collected through newspapers, police data, online judgements and court files. Through combining these resources answers to the research question were found.
The findings show 168 cases of intimate partner homicide in the Netherlands during 2009-2014. In comparison with periods earlier in the Netherlands, this implies a decrease in the average number of intimate partner homicide in comparison with 1992-2007. Nieuwbeerta and Leistra found an average of 40 intimate partner homicides each year in the Netherlands (Nieuwbeerta & Leistra, 2007) and this study found an average of 28 cases each year. The difference between the average of Nieuwbeerta and Leistra in comparison with the results of this study can be explained by the fact that this study only used solved cases. In some cases it was not known for sure who the perpetrator was, the research was still going on or the case will be processed later and therefore these cases are not included in the data. It is possible that in a few years these cases will be solved which would cause the (average) numbers in this study to increase.
The rate of intimate partner homicide per 100.000 inhabitants in the Netherlands fluctuates from 0.11-0.23 during 2009-2014. These rates are a bit lower than the rates that were found in 1998, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2003-2006 in the Netherlands. However the rates are comparable with recent rates of some Western countries noted in table 1.
Alisic et al. noted that in their study 88% of the perpetrators was male, this corresponds with the findings of this study, namely 86% of the perpetrators was male (2014). In this study there were no female-female intimate partner homicides. Male-male intimate partner homicide only accounts for 4% of the total. Serran and Firestone stated that the killing of multiple victims was almost exclusively done by men. This corresponds with this study, only the male principal perpetrators are responsible for multiple killings (2004).
Nieuwbeerta and Leistra found that three-quarter of the intimate homicides took place in a home. In 2009-2014 the intimate partner homicide crimes took place in a home in 85% of the cases, which is a bit more than the findings of Nieuwbeerta and Leistra (2007). 70% of the victims were still in a relationship with the principal perpetrator at the time of the homicide. Sunday was the weekday on which most crimes were committed and June the month in which most intimate partner homicides took place during the aforementioned period. Spring was the
31
season where most intimate partner homicides took place.
The average age of the victim and perpetrator was around 35 years during the research of Nieuwbeerta and Leistra (2007). In this study the average age of the victims is 41 year and 43 years for the perpetrator, for the perpetrators this is an increase of nearly 22%. The study of Stöckl et al. found an average of 38,5 years for the victims, which differs 2.5 year with the finding of this study.
The study of Nieuwbeerta and Leistra showed that 41% of the male perpetrators committed their crime with a stabbing weapon and used the modus strangulation in 24% of the cases. The modus operandi for male perpetrators corresponds with the findings of Nieuwbeerta and Leistra, namely (N=54, 41%), but strangulation/suffocation/hanging was used more often in this study (N=40, 30%). Alisic et al. found in their research that the modus stabbing weapon was used in 47% of the cases, this more or less corresponds with the findings of this study. As mentioned by Krug, Powell and Dahlberg the modus firearm would be much lower than in the United States. In this study firearm was the third most chosen modus (N=22).
As stated in chapter 2, some researchers found a correlation between alcohol and (intimate partner) homicide. In this study this correlation was not checked due to the fact that information of drinking prior the crime was often only achieved when the court files were accessed at the court, therefore this correlation is not checked.
It is difficult to analyze if the self-defense theory and the proprietariness theory were applicable in the Netherlands during 2009-2014. 4 women stated that their motive for their crime was that they felt threatened by their (former) partner or they felt threatened prior the crime. The motive separation is mentioned 34 times and the motive jealousy is mentioned 11 times as the motive for the principal perpetrator. It is difficult to state if the men were just hopeless and killed their partner in desperation or that they thought: ‘if I cannot have her, no one can have her’. However, the case ‘a new relationship’ mentioned before shows that there are male perpetrators who say that if someone tries to move on, they will make sure that she won’t. It is not possible to claim that the two theories are outdated, instead it looks like this study confirms the proprietariness theory, but the self-defense theory is more difficult to analyze, because the group of female principal perpetrators is small and only in 4 cases the motive threatened was applicable.
The study of Liem and Koenraadt found that on an average one in seven cases of intimate partner homicide is followed by suicide. In this study one in five and a half cases of intimate partner homicide is followed by suicide. The percentage of intimate partner homicide followed by suicide is a lot higher in this study than in the study of Nieuwbeerta and Leistra.
32
They found that 8% of the men committed suicide, in this study 21% of the men committed suicide. The percentage of the women is fairly the same, respectively 3% and 4%. The sanction that most principal perpetrators got was a prison sentence.
6.2 Limits of the study
This research included all the intimate partner homicide cases which were confirmed as homicide during the research. There were a few cases in which the perpetrator went in appeal because the perpetrator claimed to be innocent. Beside those cases, which are not included, some cases, especially crimes which were committed in 2014, were still researched. At the time of the study it was not clear who the perpetrator was or whether the suspect was indeed guilty. There were a few cases which only got one news article about a possible intimate partner homicide, but it was not possible to retrieve more information on these cases. This implies that there might have been more intimate partner homicide than the mentioned (average) numbers of this study.
In some cases there were no online judgements available and the study only used national and regional newspapers. As Malphurs and Cohen pointed out (2002) newspapers surveillance is dependent on the number of newspapers included in the searches. Besides the lack of information in some cases, there was also room for some interpretations in the case of a few variables. One of those variables was the motive of a principal perpetrator. It is possible that someone else decides to choose a different motive if news articles mentioned more motives. Therefore, the conclusions that can be drawn from the data must be treated with caution.
6.3 Recommendations
The results show that there is an increase of intimate partner homicide followed by suicide. Liem and Koenraadt concluded in 2007 that one in seven cases ends up in suicide, while this study shows that one in five and a half ends up in suicide (N=31). The problem with cases of intimate partner homicide followed by suicide is that they do not get a lot of attention from the police, judicial authorities and media. Often it is only the (regional) media that report about intimate partner homicide followed by suicide. Thus it is recommended to research intimate partner homicide followed by suicide in the Netherlands during 2009-2014.
During the time that was given for this study, it was not possible to read all the court files at the different courts in the Netherlands. Therefore, information about profession, education and citizenship were difficult to retrieve. In many cases this type of information was not available since the online judgement were anonymized and news articles often do not
33
mention that type of information. This is why the study does not contain this type of information. Information about the profession could be relevant to see if there is a difference between unemployed people, the working class, or professionals. It is recommended that in a following study, all the court files available are researched, because then more information would be gathered than in this study.
As mentioned before, most policies in the Netherlands are focused on domestic violence. The only policy that is directly related with intimate partner homicide is the proposal of State Secretary Teeven. The proposal limits the right of perpetrators to have contact with their children after intimate partner homicide. This is the first policy that is directly linked with intimate partner homicide. Proposing a policy that is based on this study is difficult, because some relevant factors do need more research. Therefore the recommendation is to first research the mentioned factors above, before proposing any kind of policy to prevent intimate partner homicide.
34
Bibliography
Alisic, E., A. Groot, H. Snetselaar, T. Stroken & E. van de Putte, (2014), ‘Zorg voor kinderen
na partnerdoding’, Utrecht: Universitair Medisch Centrum Utrecht – Psychotraumacentrum
WKZ. Retrieved from https://www.wodc.nl/onderzoeksdatabase/2382-gevolgen-van-partnerdoding-op-kinderen-en-het-recht-om-omgang.aspx?cp=44&cs=6802.
Aldridge, M. L., K. D. Browne, (2003), ‘Perpetrators of spousal homicide: A review’, Trauma,
Violence & Abuse, Vol 4, No. 3, pp. 265-276.
Babbie, E. (2010), ‘The Practice of Social Research’, Belmont: Wadsworth.
Bannister, S.A. (1991), ‘The criminalization of women fighting back against male abuse: imprisoned battered women as political prisoners’, Humanity and Society, Vol. 15, pp. 400-416. Barber, C.W., D. Azrael, D. Hemenway, L.M. Olson, C. Nie, J. Schaechter & S. Walsh, (2008), ‘Suicides and Suicide Attempts Following Homicide. Homicide Studies, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 285-297.
Block, C. R. & A. Christakos, (1995), ‘Intimate Partner Homicide in Chicago Over 29 Years’,
Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 496-526.
Block, K. J. (1990), ‘Age-related correlates of criminal homicides committed by women: a study of Baltimore’, Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 496-526.
Breiding, M. J., K. C. Basile, S.G. Smith, M.C. Black and R. M Mahendra, (2015), Intimate
Partner Violence Surveillance: Uniform Definitions and Recommended Data Elements, Atlanta
(GA): National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Georgia: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Campbell, J. C., D. Webster, J. Koziol-Mclain, C.R. Block, D. Campbell, M.A. Curry, F. Gary, J. McFarlane, C. Sachs, P. Sharps, Y. Ulrich & S.A. Wilt, (2003), ‘Assessing Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Homicide’ National Institute of Justice, Vol. 250, pp. 14-20.
Campbell, J.C., N. Glass, P.W. Sharps, K. Laughon & T. Bloom, (2007), ‘Intimate Partner Homicide: Review and Implications of Research and Policy’, Trauma Violence Abuse, Vol. 8. No. 3, pp. 246-269.
Corradi, C. & H. Stöckl, (2014), ‘Intimate partner homicide in 10 European countries: Statistical data and policy development in a cross-national perspective’, European Journal of
Criminology, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 601-618.
Dahlberg, L, L. & E. G. Krug, (2002), ‘Violence – a global public health problem’, in: E.G. Krug, L.L. Dahlberg, J.A. Mercy, A.B. Zwi & R. Lozano (Eds), World report on violence and
35
Daly, M. and M. Wilson, (1988), ‘Evolutionary Social Psychology and Family Homicide´,
Science, Vol. 242, pp. 519-524.
De Boer, A. P. (1990), ‘Partnerdoding. Een empirisch forensisch-psychiatrisch onderzoek’, Arnhem: Gouda Quint.
Devries, K.M. Mak, J.Y.T., García-Moreno, C. Petzold, M. Child, J.C. Falder, G. Lim, S. Bacchus, L. J. Engell, R.E., Rosenfeld, F. Pallitto, C. Vos, T. Abrahams, N. and C.H. Watts, (2013), ‘The Global Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women’, Science, Vol. 340, pp. 1527-1528.
Fox, A., M.W. Zawitz, (2007), ‘Homicide trends in the United States’, Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. Available at http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=966.
Frye, V., J. Manganello, J.C. Campbell, B. Walton-Moss & S. Wilt, (2006), ‘The distribution of and factors associated with intimate terrorism and situational couple violence among a population-based sample of urban women in the United States’, Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, Vol. 21, No. 10, pp. 1286-1313.
Granath, S. (2015), ‘Det dödliga våldet i Sverige 1990–2014, rapport 2015:24’. Kalmar: Lenanders Grafiska AB.
Granath, S., J. Hagstedt, J. Kivivuori, M. Lethi, S. Ganpat, M. Liem & P. Nieuwbeerta, (2011), ‘Homicide in Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden: A first study on the European homicide
monitor data’, Stockholm: Brå.
Gauthier, D. K. & W. B. Bankston, (1997), ‘Gender equality and the sex ration of intimate killing’, Criminology, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 577-600.
Goussinsky, R. & D. Yassour-Borochowitz, (2012), ‘I killed her, but I ever laid a finger on her. A phenomenological difference between wife-killing and wife-battering’, Aggression and
Violent Behavior, Vol. 17, pp. 553–564.
Gyimah-Brempong, K., & J. Racine, (2006), ‘Alcohol availability and crime: A robust approach.’, Applied Economics, vol. 38, pp. 1293-1307.
Hiroeh, U., L. Appleby, P.B. Mortensen & G. Dunn, (2001), ‘Death by homicide, suicide, and other unnatural causes in people with mental illness: A population-based study’, The Lancet, vol. 358, pp. 2110-2112.
Koenraadt, F. & M. Liem, (2010), ‘Fataal huiselijk geweld. Doding van eigen kind, partner of ouder, ‘Justitiële verkenningen’, Vol. 8, pp. 100-114.
Krug, E.G., K.E. Powell & L.L. Dahlberg, (1998), ‘Firearm-related deaths in the United States and 35 other high- and upper-middle-income countries’, International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 27, pp. 214-221.
