روش کار و اختلال شخصیتی در زندانی قاتلان

Introduction Previous studies of uxoricide (wife murder) have tended to focus on the ratio of uxoricide to femicide (killing of women), prior histories of physical abuse, use of excessive force (“overkill”), and the role of estrangement as risk factors. However, little attention has been directed toward personality disorder in perpetrators of uxoricide and whether personality disorder relates to the modus operandi pattern of the murder. Campbell (1992) found that 28 of 65 femicides in Ohio were uxoricides. Of these, 18 of 28 (68%) had recorded histories of previous physical abuse, and 17 of 28 (61%) used “excessive force” during the killing. Wolfgang (1956) had found that 44 of 53 husbands who killed their wives did so with excessive force. His definition of excessive force was two or more separate actions of stabbing, cutting, or shooting, involved in the process of slaying the victim. Cooper (1994) also reported excessive force as frequent (51% of cases of uxoricide). In a study of 896 woman killings (femicides) with identified perpetrators in Ontario from 1974 to 1990, Crawford and Gartner (1992) found that 551 (62%) were killed by intimate partners. Of all femicides where a motive for the killing could be established from police records, 32% were “estrangement killings”, another 11% were based on beliefs that the female partner was sexually unfaithful, a variation of the abandonment fear without actual physical estrangement (Dutton, 1995). Crawford and Gartner (1992) also reported excessive force as frequent (60% of uxoricides). Crawford and Gartner (1992) found that 551 of 896 (62%) of femicides in Ontario were uxoricides. Of the uxoricides, 297 had prior recorded histories of domestic violence, 166 had records of threats to the woman, and 130 had records of prior police intervention. Both Stout (1993) and Cooper (1994) reported that use of a knife was the most common modus operandi of uxoricide. Both studies found that 41% of uxoricides were the result of stabbings. The use of firearms declines from nonfamily murders (60%) to family murders (40%) (Dawson & Langan 1994).

Results As can be seen in Table 1, most (78 of 90) of the uxoricides in this sample were reactive, unplanned events. Surprisingly, in almost a third of the cases, the victim was killed with the perpetrators bare hands. Where a weapon was used, it was usually a knife, the most prevalent and accessible weapon. Evidence for “overkill” was present in the modus operandi of these murders, with 5 to 25 blows or stabs occurring, according to coroners' reports. It was rare for another person to be killed (9 of 90), but when this occurred, it was generally the victims' current lover (see Table 2). Table 1. Modus Operandi of Spousal Homicides Evidence for planning? Yes 12 No 78 Weapon used? No 28 Yes 62 Type Knife 34 Handgun 10 Rifle/shotgun 9 Club 9 Number of blows or stabs (range) 5–25 Another person killed? Yes 9 Woman's current lover 7 Stranger 1 Infant son 1 No 81 Perpetrator calls police? Yes 20 No 70 Suicide attempt? Yes 30 No 60 Try to hide body? Yes 35 No 55 Evidence for estrangement? Yes 60 No 30 Suicide when estrangment occurs? Yes 30 No 30 History of domestic violence? Yes 60 No 30 Prior separations? Yes 70 No 20 Location: Victim's residence 45/90 Family home 45/90 Table options Table 2. Behavioral Contingencies for Spousal Homicide Probability of (%): Weapon used Calling police Fleeing Hiding body Overkill Suicide attempt Knife (30 cases) 10 10 20 40 30 Gun (14 cases) 25 16 50 25 86 Club (10 cases) 10 10 30 50 50 None (30 cases) 10 60 33 25 25 Table options Also somewhat surprisingly, 20 of 90 killers called the police themselves. About a third attempted suicide but another third tried to hide the body. Evidence for estrangement killings was strong. About two thirds of all uxoricides were estrangement motivated, these typically had histories of domestic violence (56 of 60), and prior separations (54 of 60; see Table 3). Table 3. Relationship History for Estrangement and Nonestrangement Estrangement (%) No estrangement (%) History of domestic violence 93 13 Prior separations 90 20 Table options Personality Disorder Presence of personality disorder was determined using the MCMI (Millon, 1987) criterion cut-off of 85th percentile above baseline. According to this criterion, the most prevalent type of personality disorder associated with uxoricide were the passive-aggressive (M = 88.6), avoidant (M = 80.1), self-defeating (81.0) and dependent (M = 78.8) diagnoses. These “overcontrolled” personality types are generally believed to suppress rage (see Table 4). Table 4. Scores on the MCMI-11 of Lethal and Nonlethal Spouse Abusers Nonlethal controls (n = 50) Lethal group (n = 50) M (SD) Score > 85 (%) M (SD) Score > 85 (%) t p Schizoid 58.8 (24.6) 8.8 76.5 (21.1) 46.0 3.7 .01 Avoidant 65.4 (32.8) 35.3 80.1 (22.2) 49.0 3.4 .01 Dependent 38.8 (29.6) 3.0 78.8 (22.6) 46.0 6.9 .001 Antisocial 73.1 (20.1) 44.1 64.1 (32.6) 33.0 2.3 .01 Borderline 72.3 (24.5) 38.2 71.6 (24.1) 34.0 NS NS Sadistic 85.6 (23.1) 50.0 59.2 (24.6) 26.0 5.7 .001 Passive-aggressive 83.5 (30.2) 52.9 88.6 (22.6) 61.0 1.9 .05 Self-defeating 69.6 (26.2) 14.7 81.0 (22.6) 51.0 7.1 .001 MCMI-II = Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-II; NS = not significant. Table options In comparison to nonlethal spouse assaulters, these “overcontrolled” personalities were more prevalent than the more expressive types (antisocial, aggressive-sadistic). Personality Disorder and Modus Operandi Estrangement killings were exclusively committed by men with overcontrolled “dependent” type personality disorders. By contrast, antisocial personality disorders engaged in instrumental killings that were more likely to be planned (see Table 5). Antisocial personality disorders were more likely to hide the body (t = 3.4, p < .01) and less likely to report posthomicide suicidal feelings (t = 4.1, p < .01). Table 5. Instrumental and “Estrangement” Murders by Personality Disorder Diagnosed by MCMI-II Instrumental Estrangement Antisocial (n = 15) 15 0 Dependent/Avoidant/ Self-defeating (n = 26) 0 26 MCMI-II = Millon Clinical Multiphasic Inventory-II.