Homicide - Mass Murder Lectures PDF

Introduction War, genocide, terrorism and other forms of collective violence are a prominent features of human history that have caused an enormous amount of pain, suffering, and death Centrally concerned with aggression and violence Criminology as a discipline has paid relatively little a...

Introduction War, genocide, terrorism and other forms of collective violence are a prominent features of human history that have caused an enormous amount of pain, suffering, and death Centrally concerned with aggression and violence Criminology as a discipline has paid relatively little attention to the phenomenon of collective violence, although there has been recent interest in organised terrorism and genocide from a criminological perspective (e.g., Agnew, 2010; Karstedt et al., 2021) What is collective violence? [Collective violence is] the instrumental use of violence by people who identify themselves as members of a group – whether this group is transitory or has a more permanent identity – against another group or set of individuals (Zwi, Garfield & Loretti, 2002, p. 215) - involves acts of inter-group aggression and violence - involves social substitutability - borderline cases  Types of collective violence War – Organised armed conflict between different groups/nation states Genocide - Any of a number of acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. (Organised) Terrorism – The criminal murder (i.e. non-state sanctioned) of innocent victims for political, religious and/or social purposes Gang violence – organised group conflict among rival groups who self-identify as members of specific ‘gangs’ Note: There are considerable unresolved issues in each of these definitions and they should not be viewed as definitive  The toll of collective violence 10. 16 Million – Atlantic Slave Trade (1452-1807) 9. 17 Million – Timur (1370-1405) 8. 18.5 Million - Mideast slave trade (7th to 9th Century) 6 = 20 Million - Joseph Stalin (1928-1953) 6 = 20 Million - Taiping Rebellion (1850-1864) 5. 25 Million - Fall of the Ming Dynasty (1635- 1662) 4. 27 Million – Famines in British India (18th to 20th Centuries) 2. = 40 Million - Mao Zedong (1949-1976) 2 = 40 Million – Chinggis Kkan (1206-27) 1. 66 Million – Second World War (1939-1945)  Is War Declining? The Long Peace War between groups has been a prominent feature throughout human history The 20th century was, in absolute terms, the bloodiest on human record (Hemoclysm) Yet, as Pinker (2011) points out, there were also a lot more people alive Since 1945 there has been a significant decline in war among nation states However the ongoing conflicts in Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan and other locations paints a different picture Evolutionary Approaches Does collective violence have an evolutionary basis? Sources of Evidence - coalitional, intergroup aggression in chimpanzees - relative ubiquity of collective violence in history and pre-history - relative ubiquity of collective violence among hunter-gatherers and small scale societies - psychology of “parochial altruism” Adaptation or by-product? (Durrant, 2011) The idea that war has an ‘evolutionary basis’ is much contested (Glowacki et al., 2020) Social-Structural and Cultural Approaches Conflict is shaped by a range of political, economic, societal, cultural and demographic factors - often associated with political instability - disputes over resources - response to perceived injustice or oppression - revenge or retaliation - driven by specific ideologies or belief systems Psychological Approaches Humans are reluctant to kill fellow humans ohuman capacity for empathy and compassion oUniversal normative prescriptions against killing humans in most circumstances ▪We need to explain how are ‘normal’ inhibitions against harming others are overcome (Grossman, 2018) Three Classic Studies in Psychology How can psychology help us to understand these acts of collective violence? The Milgram Obedience Studies The Stanford Prison Experiment The Robber’s Cave Study  The Milgram Obedience Studies In Milgram’s studies a volunteer was asked to take the part of a ‘teacher’, while another volunteer (actually a confederate) took the role of ‘learner’. The teacher’s task was to administer electric shocks at increasing levels when the ‘learner’ gave the incorrect answer. Despite protests from the ‘learner’ many participants were willing to shock to the highest level (450 volts). How might this research might be relevant for understanding collective violence? (see Burger, 2009; Benjamin & Simpson, 2009)Twenge, 2009)  The Stanford Prison Experiment In the Stanford Prison Experiment, college students were assigned randomly to play the role of either guard or prisoner. Despite knowledge that it was only an experiment, the prisoner’s rapidly showed signs of mental distress and many of the ‘guards’ started behaving in a cruel and sadistic fashion. After 6 days the experiment had to be called off. How might this research might be relevant for understanding collective violence?  The Robber’s Cave Experiment In the robber’s cave experiment 11-year-old boys were randomly assigned to one of two groups. A sense of group identity and cohesion quickly developed. During the second phase the two groups competed for prizes. Conflict between the two groups escalated to name calling and property damage. When the two groups were brought together to work on superordinate goals, conflict between the two groups decreased. How might this research be relevant for understanding collective violence? Take Home Lessons Social Influence People have a tendency to obey legitimate authority figures; harm is more easily inflicted on distant others and when responsibility for harm is taken away from them People have a tendency to rapidly conform to particular roles and to act in ways that may be contrary to their normal behaviour; when people act in groups responsibility is diffused (deindividuation) Group Psychology People have a tendency to think in terms of in-groups and out-groups, to favour in-groups and to discriminate against out-groups Inter-group processes: Key points Humans seem to think ‘naturally’ in terms of in-groups and out- groups There is a strong tendency to favour in-groups (and discriminate against out-groups) especially in situations involving conflict We feel pleasure at in-group success an anger at in-group failure We can also feel pleasure at a rival group’s failure (counter-empathy or Schadenfreude) We can also feel anger at a rival group’s success (Glückschmerz) These processes tend to be enhanced the more we feel that our identify and the identity of the group over-lap – Identity Fusion (see Atran’s Devoted Actor Model)  Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement (Bandura, 1999) Moral Justification Minimizing, ignoring, or Advantageous Comparison misconstruing the consequences Euphemistic Labeling Reprehensible Detrimental Victim Conduct Effects Displacement/Diffusion of Responsibility  Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement (Bandura, 1999) Moral Justification Minimizing, ignoring, or Advantageous Comparison misconstruing the consequences Euphemistic Labeling Reprehensible Detrimental Victim Conduct Effects Dehumanisation/Attribution Displacement/Diffusion of of Blame Responsibility Genocide in Rwanda, 1994 Background Rwanda consists of two main tribal groups – majority Hutu and minority Tutsi Historically, the Tutsi were the dominant tribal group However, the Hutu were dominant when Rwanda achieved independence in 1962 and Hutu ruling elite marginalised and discriminated against Tutsi In 1990 exiled Tutsi launched a failed invasion of Rwanda Sequence of events April, 1994, governing president of Rwanda was killed in a plane crash Over the next two months some 800,000 Tutsi and moderate Hutu were raped, mutilated and slaughtered – a rate of killing of 100,000 individuals a week Approximately 86% of all Tutsi were killed  What is lone actor terrorism? Terrorism can be defined as “attacks against non-combatants to cause fear and to advance a political aim” (Victoroff & Kruglanski, 2009, p. 1). The definition of lone actor terrorism (LAT) is highly contested but it can be generally viewed as terrorist attacks perpetrated by one, two or three individuals as long as there is no direction given from a wider group, or individuals linked to a group (Gill & Corner, 2016; Gill et al., 2014) Therefore... LAT can be distinguished from rampage shooting incidents because there is some ideological/political component to the attack LAT can be distinguished from organised terrorism because there is no direct organised link to a terrorist group – individuals are acting on their own initiative Aotearoa New Zealand: Christchurch Mosque Shootings, 15 March, 2019  Mass murder; Mass murder; Not Organised, organised, Collective, ‘individual, directed at ‘out- directed at ‘out’ groups’ groups War, Lone Actor Terrorism, Terrorism Genocide Interpersonal Rampage Homicide Shooting Single murder; Mass murder; Not Not organised, organised, ‘individual, usually ‘individual’, not directed at known directed at out- individuals groups  Study 1: Liem et al., (2017) Key Research Question How do lone actor terrorists differ from common homicide offenders? Sample European lone actor terrorists between 2000 and 2016 (n=98); and a comparison sample of ‘common’ homicide offenders between 2003 and 2006 (n=300) Lone Actor Terrorists were more likely to... Personal Event Level Event Level Characteristics Characteristics Characteristics Be younger Target Perpetrate offence Have higher strangers/random in a public space education level individuals Not have a criminal Use explosives and conviction vehicles, and Not have indication Not use knives of substance abuse However, there was no different on a number of important variables, including: Marital status, employment, and mental health  Ideological Connection (Liem et al., 2017) 2% 6% 3% 29% 17% Far right Religiously Inspired Black Nationalist 5% Other Single Issue 38% Left Wing Ethnonationlist  Study 2: Capellan (2015) Key Research Question How do ‘ideological active shooter’ events and offenders differ from ‘non-ideological active shooter’ events and offenders? Sample Data set of 282 active shooter events that occurred in the United States between 1970 and 2014 (Ideological N = 40; Non-Ideological N = 242)  Ideologically active shooters significantly more likely to... Personal Event Level Event Level Characteristics Characteristics Characteristics Have no clear Injured and Have a precipitating killed more criminal event individuals record Had Used multiple discussed firearms plan Have higher Targeted levels of strangers planning But no difference on many variables: marital status, mental health status, age, gender, or education level. Also note small sample size Ideological Connection (Capellan, 2015) 6% 1% 20% Far right Jihad Inspired 73% Black Nationalist Other  Study 3: Turnbull (2019) Key Research Question How do rampage shooting events/perpetrators differ from lone actor terrorist events/perpetrators? Sample Data set of 134 incidents that occurred in the United States and Europe between 2010 and 2018 (Lone Actor: N = 76; Rampage: N = 58)  Lone Actor Terrorists were significantly more likely to... Personal Event Level Event Level Characteristics Characteristics Characteristics Be younger Use weapons other Not have a clear Be unemployed than firearms precipitating event Not have had Target strangers Not have clear work/school issues Have medium/high emotional/relationship level of planning issue Not have a personal grievance But no difference on many variables: mental health status, gender, social isolation, or criminal history. Also note small sample size  Study 4: Fitzgerald (2020) Key Research Question How do right wing extremist (RWE) LAT differ from Islamic extremist (IE) LAT? Sample Data set of 111 incidents that occurred in the United States, Western Europe and Australia between 2010 and 2017 (RWE: N = 37; IE: N = 74)  Right Wing Extremists were significantly more likely to... Personal Event Level Event Level Characteristics Characteristics Characteristics Be older Not have Target social Less educated authorities minorities and Single aware of less likely to status/planning target general Have no civilians children But no difference on many variables: employment status, mental health, social isolation, stressors, criminal history, level of planning  Interim Summary Obtaining a clear picture of the characteristics of LAT and how they might differ from homicide offenders in general and rampage shooters in particular is a difficult task. However... LAT typically involve more planning, less related to particular precipitating event, more likely to target strangers and to have leaked their plans Few differences between RWE and IE Surprisingly little or no differences in supposedly key variables like mental health status and social isolation variables among all comparisons in the four studies  Critical issues in the study of Lone Actor Terrorism (Kenyon et al., 2023) Systematic literature review – 109 Sources 10 Key themes  Kenyon et al., 2023 Ambiguity of lone-actor definitions and use Theme 1 of typologies Theme 2 Heterogeneity of Lone Actor terrorism Prevalence of mental health issues and Theme 3 personality disorders Theme 4 Similarity with other lone offender types Motivation driven by ideological and Theme 5 personal influences  Kenyon et al., 2023 Theme 6 Increasing internet use Theme 7 Ties with other extremists, groups or wider movements Theme 8 Attack planning and preparation Theme 9 Role of opportunity and triggers Tendency towards leakage/attack Theme 10 signalling General Factors Related to ‘group’ related violence Psychological – ingroup/outgroup dynamics, moral disengagement processes Social/Situational – Realistic conflict, history of past conflict, grievances, ideology, structure of the state  Devoted Actor Model Identity Sacred Fusion Values See references by Atran and colleagues for further details  Identity Fusion Identity fusion involves a sense of ‘oneness’ with your group – ingroup-outgroup dynamics Strongly fused individuals are more likely to engage in sacrifices for their group  Sacred Values Values which have specific meaning Sacred values promote behaviour that is less sensitive (or entirely insensitive) to risks, rewards, or compromises ‘devoted actors are deontic actors’ (Atran, 2016) Question: To what extent can the devoted actor model explain instances of LAT?  Theories of radicalisation (Webber and Kruglanski, 2018) Experience of Individual humiliation (personal or Need collective) Frames Ideological violence against Narrative enemies as legitimate Facilitates Social identity fusion; creates Network normative context When we combine these three factors – Needs, Narratives and Networks – a clear picture of radicalization emerges; a varied number of experiences activate a quest for feelings of personal significance, and through connections to likeminded individuals, and an ideology that justifies violence, violent extremism becomes a viable and potent mechanism for earning feelings of worth. (Webber and Kruglanski, 2018, p. 132) Distal Proximate Evolutionary Factors Individual Factors - Ingroup/outgroup - Identify fusion processes - Interest in weapons/warfare - Specific ideological beliefs - Mental disorder Motivational/Emotional Processes - Revenge Mass - Dehumanisation Murder - Ideology Cultural and Social Situational Factors Structural Factors - Rejection - Availability of firearms - Failure - Availability of scripts/like - Other sources of acute minded individuals strain - Political conflict - Availability of weapons - Availability of targets  Key Questions What are the different types of mass murder How common is mass murder? What are the characteristics of offenders? How can we explain why individuals perpetrate mass murder?  What is Mass Murder? “Mass murder is the killing of three or more people at one time and one place” (Holmes & Holmes, 2010, p. 73) FBI criteria – 4 or more victims without a ‘cooling off’ period Distinguished from serial murder and spree murder  Types of Mass Murder Familicide: The killing of partner and/or children Robbery-related Gang-related Rampage shooting: Largely occurring in public spaces with four more victims, not related to criminal event (Focus of this lecture) Lone actor terrorism: Similar to Rampage shooting more generally, but offender has some kind of religious or political ideology and there is often a targeting of particular groups (Focus of next lecture) The Nature and Extent of Mass Murder Duwe (2004, 2017) (Roque and Duwe, 2018) Analysis of FBI homicide reports and news accounts of mass murder in US between 1900-1999 - Total of 909 Mass murder incidents - Average death toll – 5.39 per incident - Overall trends in mass murder rates tend to parallel those for homicide  Patterns of mass murder: 1900-1999 (Duwe, 2004) Offender age 30-49 1976-1999 Male victims Male offender 1900-1975 Public location Family member Gun 0 20 40 60 80 100  The Nature and Extent of Mass Murder 2001-2010 (United States) (Huff-Corzine et al., 2014) - 444 offenders - 1410 victims 80% of offenders male, 8% female, 12% unknown 56% of victims male 37% of perpetrators between age 21-30 44% of events involved handgun 62% occurred in residence/home The Nature and Extent of Mass Murder China 2000-2011 (Hilal et al., 2013) - 165 mass murder events - 211 perpetrators - 696 victims Most common weapon – Knife (N=94)  Patterns and Prevalence of Mass Murder in the US Whether or not rampage shootings are dramatically increasing remains a matter of debate Capellan & Gomez (2018) - 1984-1999: 88 attacks - 2000-2014: 206 attacks But Rocque and Duwe (2018) question whether rates have increased since the 21st century Duwe (2020) provides the most up to date analysis Trends in prevalence of mass public shooting 1976-2018 (Duwe, 2020)  Trends in prevalence of mass public shooting victims 1976-2018 (Duwe, 2020) However... Mass shootings in US to July 4 each year from 2014-2022 (source: Mass shootings in 2022: U.S. sees more than 300 so far - The Washington Post; also see Schildkraut et al., 2022) 338 314 265 207 187 174 158 162 121 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Number of mass shootings in developed countries (1998-2019) (Silva, 2023) Number of mass shootings fatalities in developed countries (1998-2019) (Silva, 2023)  Explaining Mass Murder: Motivations and precipitants Study of 152 mass FINANCIAL 21.71 murders in US between 2007-2011 CRIME 23 Data drawn from FBI supplementary MENTAL DISORDER 29.61 homicide reports and from USA today Taylor, M. A. (2018). RELATIONSHIP 38.16 EMOTIONAL TRIGGER 50.66 0 20 40 60  Characteristics of Rampage Shooters (Data from Duwe, 2020) Largely male (98.1%) Mental illness – estimates vary from 40-80% of rampage shooters (61.4%) More likely to be single/divorced and unemployed Interest in weapons/warfare Role of precipitating factors: rejection, failure, alienation, financial problems (65.2%) Idea of payback or revenge prominent A Partial Model of Mass School Shootings (Thompson & Kyle, 2005) Ineffective Guardianship Poor moral development Peer Marginalization Personhood Blocked School Environment Propensity towards self- Competition assertion, yet lacking moral/ethical guidelines Labels and marginalizes losers Demand for Significance Blocked personhood requires aggression/violence A cumulative strain model of mass murder at school (Levin & Madfis, 2009) Stage 1: Stage 2: Chronic Strain Uncontrolled Strain Stage 4: Stage 3: Planning stage Acute Strain Stage 5: Massacre at school Distal Proximate Evolutionary Factors Individual Factors - Status Seeking - Narcissism - Interest in weapons/warfare - Mental disorder Motivational/Emotional Processes - Revenge - Control Mass - Power Murder - Dehumanisation Cultural and Social Situational Factors Structural Factors - Rejection - Cultural emphasis on - Failure success and fame - Other sources of acute - Availability of firearms strain - Availability of scripts - Availability of weapons - Availability of targets