Tracking Intimate Partner Homicide Risk Escalation: The Homicide Timeline
Intimate Partner Homicide (IPH) is a serious social and criminal justice issue and statistics suggest the problem is increasing. This puts serious pressure on those who respond to domestic abuse, coercive control, and intimate partner stalking, to be able to confidently assess the risk, or spot risk escalation. In today’s analysis Dr Jane Monckton Smith discusses her research tracking intimate partner homicide risk escalation.
This research looked at 372 cases of IPH with the aim of identifying a ‘typical’ chronology of events leading to the homicide. The results were interesting and there was indeed a dominant sequence identified, which was then organised into eight key stages. This model is based on an understanding that coercive control is the most effective predictor for homicide, and this is supported in international research. Understanding risk through coercive control is a challenge to some traditional ideas that IPH can be explained through a ‘crime of passion’ narrative. This narrative suggests that IPH is spontaneous and unpredictable. The general opinion of researchers across the western world is that IPH is in fact, one of the most predictable crimes.
The homicide timeline is an accessible and simple way to organise the risk escalation, but also understand coercive control more fully. The eight stages of the timeline are as follows, with a short explanation of each stage, and then at the end, a short discussion around how it is being used in a practical sense, and this puts the potential uses into context.
The stages are sequential, in that one follows on from another and show how and why risk may be escalating taking account of the perpetrator mind-set.
Stage One: History
Partner homicide does not come ‘out of the blue.’ Photo by chuttersnap on Unsplash
We found that in most cases the perpetrator has a history of control, domestic abuse or stalking. This history is not tracked solely through convictions, especially as they are rarely achieved. Reports from previous partners around jealousy, possessiveness and control were found in many cases, and are predictive of potential for future coercive control.
Stage Two: Commitment whirlwind
In this stage, we found that normal romantic activities were speeded up with perpetrators seeking early and firm commitment to a relationship. This is very important because once commitment is given it cannot be retracted. Many perpetrators feel only they can end the relationship, and that commitment gives them rights, and gives the victim responsibilities. Perpetrators interpret commitment in different ways, some see a sexual encounter as important, others will see pregnancy, cohabitation or regular dating as key. Not all perpetrators are the same.
Stage Three: relationship proper
Once a relationship is formed with a person who is possessive and controlling, the likelihood is in cases more likely to end in harm or homicide, that that relationship will be dominated by coercive control. Some perpetrators use violence, others do not. This behaviour seeks to effectively trap the victim within the relationship creating barriers to them leaving. Many controlling tactics are used and many of these are noted on risk checklists like DASH.
Stage Four: Trigger
This stage is when risk starts to increase. It is when something happens to challenge the control the perpetrator has, or challenges their status. The most significant trigger noted internationally is separation or its threat. Perpetrators have been guarding against separation, and see it more as outrageous or unacceptable, than heart breaking. Other triggers we noted were financial ruin, pregnancy, illness (mental or physical), life changes like retirement or redundancy or revenge. A good example is dementia. For example if the victim suffers with dementia this means they respond to the control differently, but also medical and other professionals become involved and take control over many decisions and routines. Some of these homicides are often described as ‘mercy killings’.
Stage Five: Escalation
In this stage, the reduction in control prompts some perpetrators to seek to try to regain it. They may increase controlling patterns, or use violence, they may threaten suicide or homicide, and they may beg and cry. Some will switch between all of these. Threats at this stage should be taken very seriously. Even small threats, when acted on, show a clear escalation in risk and threat.
Stage Six: a change in thinking
This stage can be very difficult for professionals to detect, but victims may notice subtle changes. We noted in some cases that the perpetrator becomes calmer; sometimes victims noted and increase in menace, sometimes the anger increases. It is at this stage that the perpetrator decides how they will resolve the situation. In most cases, they will either find another victim and the whole cycle starts again, or the victim may go back and then things return to stage three until the next trigger, some will exact campaigns of revenge, but for our purposes, this is the stage where they may decide to resolve things though homicide.
Stage seven: Planning
This stage is very interesting as this is a big challenge to the crime of passion narrative. However, we found evidence of planning in many cases. This might be internet searches for methods to kill; it may be grave digging or buying weapons. We know of some cases where murder kits were kept in vehicles. The planning stage is where they decide how the homicide will happen. In those perpetrators who are routinely violent, travel through the stages may be very quick, but census data shows than many may have a month gap or more, between a trigger and a homicide
Stage Eight: Homicide
This stage has great diversity in that it could be a homicide with immediate confession, it could be homicide/suicide, it could involve children or others, it may be hidden or staged as something else. It is interesting to note also that victim suicide follows this pattern in many cases, with the perpetrator travelling through the initial stages, and the victim following the final stages.
Interventions can be effective at any stage in the sequence; we saw homicides stop at stage seven with intervention. Each stage suggests different interventions and this is interesting from a practical perspective. The sequence is already being used in many different ways. For example, it is being developed by some police forces into their risk assessment processes alongside risk checklists, the probation service have it in their training, and it is being used by police and other agencies and services, it has been used in charging decisions and in homicide investigations. The sequence is meant to give a clearer picture of risk escalation, and potential intention and mind-set of a perpetrator. Its development may be through professionals in practice looking at its uses and designing interventions at every stage.
Further links to media and resources can be found here:
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-49481998?__twitter_impression=true
https://twitter.com/VAWJournal
Support can be found here:
https://au.reachout.com/articles/domestic-violence-support
https://www.whiteribbon.org.au/find-help/domestic-violence-hotlines/
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/
This post is part of the Women's Policy Action Tank initiative to analyse government policy using a gendered lens. View our other policy analysis pieces here.