Citation

Enander V, Krantz G, Lövestad S, Ormon K. J. Gender Based Viol. 2022; 6(3): 501-517.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, Centre for Gender and Violence Research, University of Bristol, Publisher Policy Press)

DOI

10.1332/239868021X16317122802413

PMID

unavailable

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.

Language: en