An analysis of the characteristics and motives of the UK homicides involving acts of dismemberment

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to contribute to the evidence base by analysing the characteristics and motives of homicides involving acts of dismemberment. Design/methodology/approach The current study explored offence, victim and offender characteristics and the motives for 71 homicides involving dismemberment using open source data. All cases included in this study were investigated in the UK between 1970 and 2016. A non-metric multi-dimensional scaling procedure smallest space analysis (SSA) was used to explore the characteristics and motives derived from a content analysis of homicide data sourced online. Findings A distinction between expressive and instrumental characteristics was observable with three thematic regions identified: instrumental – defensive, instrumental – predatory and expressive – affective. Support was found for previously identified motives for criminal dismemberment, with defensive being the most common motive identified in 63% (N = 45) of the cases. Originality/value The implications of the findings are discussed with suggestions made for future research. The findings have practical implications for assisting law enforcement and forensic and clinical practitioners in further understanding offenders who engage in homicidal dismemberment. This includes aiding homicide investigations, in terms of supporting investigators to draw upon offence, victim and offender characteristics and motives for homicides involving acts of dismemberment. Differentiation between cases of dismemberment and understanding of motives also has practical implications for the development of interventions and treatment pathways for homicide offenders who dismember victims.

How restrictions of choice affect the sense of agency: the case of personal autonomy in prison

“…Whereas it is important to examine how characteristics that are associated with the prison context, such as the prison regime, the duration of detention and social interaction, affect the SoA in prison, there are many individual characteristics that play a complex role in criminal behaviour and reentry to society after prison release. Several studies have been conducted to predict criminal behaviour and refrainment from criminal behaviour after prison release (Aaltonen et al , 2016; Blagden and Perrin, 2018; Bukstel and Kilmann, 1980; Filkin et al , 2022; Grieger et al , 2012; Hoeve et al , 2014; Jacobs and Gottlieb, 2020; Jerry et al , 2022; McCafferty and Scherer, 2017; Pointon and Wright, 2023). These studies include a range of static criminogenic factors that are unchangeable, such as age, criminal history and family history, that might interact with SoA.…”

“…Furthermore, there is a wide variety of offender motivations and identities that have been found to play a substantial role in desistance (Blagden and Perrin, 2018; Bonta and Andrews, 2003; Filkin et al , 2022; Pointon and Wright, 2023). Several themes of motivation for criminal behaviour, including substance misuse and broader enjoyment of risk-taking behaviours, financial gain and development of a criminal status, alongside fear and rejection of authority, were identified in the literature.…”

The current role and contribution of ‘forensic clinical psychologists’ (FCPs) to criminal investigation in the United Kingdom

“…The above taxonomy on mental disorders is often relevant to investigative advice and may also further the understanding of specific underlying psychopathology, such as psychopathy and sadism (Dhingra and Boduszek, 2013; Porter et al , 2003; Woodworth et al , 2013), anger/sadistic typology (Chai et al , 2021), the link between childhood physical abuse and sadistic traits (Cazala et al (2023), distinction between instrumental and expressive aggression in cases of homicide (Meloy, 2006; Santtila et al , 2003), motivational pattern of habitual sex offenders (Reid et al , 2014), motivation involving acts of dismemberment in homicides (Pointon and Wright, 2023), sexually motivated murders (Schlesinger, 2007), face covering in homicide cases (Rainbow et al , 2021) and overcontrolled hostility (Gudjonsson, 2018, pp. 153-155; Gudjonsson et al , 1989, 1991).…”