Sharp force trauma relating to cultural anthropology

C H A P T E R

12

The Pattern of Violence and Aggression

Ann H. Ross 1 , Ashley Humphries

1 and Eugenia Cunha

2,3

1Department of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC,

United States 2National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, Lisbon, Portugal 3Centre for Functional Ecology, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra,

Coimbra, Portugal

INTRODUCTION

Homicide cases involving mutilation evoke both morbid interest and repulsion as the act of dismemberment is thought to be relatively rare. However, Quatrehomme (2007) states they are rather common and Ross (see Chapter 11: Tool Mark Identification on Bone: Best Practice) states that dismemberments are underreported due to that current homicide reporting systems do not allow for accurate counts. Mutilation is “the act of depriving an individual of a limb, or other important part of the body; or deprival of an organ; or severe disfigurement, which also covers the term dismemberment” (Sea and Beauregard, 2016: 2). With increased attention on the strengthening of the forensic sciences (i.e., 2009 NAS report), cases of dismemberment and mutilation deserve more consider- ation as the interpretation of the context will be an important component in the progres- sion of the investigation as well as for probative purposes. Three major intersections will be reviewed including the motive of the mutilation, and the interpretation of the tool marks and pattern of mutilation (mode) as these play an important role in the evaluation of the crime and ultimately the sentencing of the perpetrator. Further, a summary of trends including the perpetrator and victim profiles will also be reviewed in light of cul- tural variations. Finally, recommendations to clarify terminology and reporting of these unique cases will be presented.

Dismemberment can result from a number of instances. For example, it is not uncom- mon for dismemberment to occur in high velocity traffic accidents or suicides. Out of 3940 deaths occurring between 2000 and 2007, Dogan and colleagues (2010) identified seven dismemberment cases in Turkey, only one of which was related to criminal intent. Four of

183 Dismemberments

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811912-9.00012-5 © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

these incidents were the result of suicide via jumping in front of a train and two of them were due to traffic accidents. As a result, they conclude that most dismemberments in Turkey occur in accidents and suicides. This information is helpful in understanding dis- memberment trends cross-culturally. However, we recommend distinguishing criminal dismemberment/mutilation from dismemberment/mutilation resulting from accidents or suicides as they have very different medicolegal processes and outcomes. Therefore, the remaining chapter will focus solely on criminal dismemberments.

CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMINAL DISMEMBERMENTS

In 1918, Ziemke defined defensive and offensive dismemberments in which a defensive dismemberment is performed following a homicide to transport, conceal, or hinder the identification of the victim (Konopka et al., 2007). This motivation can either be planned, such as in the case of a serial killer, or may occur without any foresight, such as in the case of a family dispute gone wrong (Rajs et al., 1998; Häkkänen-Nyholm et al., 2009; Dogan et al., 2010). However, at least in European contexts, defensive mutilations are more likely to be committed by a close family member or friend (Rajs et al., 1998; Konopka et al., 2007, 2016; see various chapters in this volume for examples).

An offensive mutilation is performed by a perpetrator who receives gratification through a sexually motivated homicide or through the dismemberment itself. Further divi- sions were proposed by Püschel and Koops (1987) to include aggressive and necromanic dismemberment. Aggressive dismemberments are those in which the homicide is brought on by a fit of rage where the dismemberment could be the continuation of an “overkill” or be the cause of death itself. Aggressive mutilations are commonly associated with impul- sivity, multiple injuries, and the potential presence of defensive wounds (Rajs et al., 1998). For example, Dogan et al. (2010) report a matricide in which the victim’s schizophrenic daughter murdered her mother. At least 71 incised and stab wounds were identified on the victim’s head, five stab wounds were present in the right chest cavity, defensive cut marks were located on the hands, the right ear was severed from the head, and the victim was decapitated. In addition, the perpetrator removed the right arm at the location of the scapulohumeral joint and removed both hands at the level of the wrists. Due to the large number and superficial nature of the stab wounds on the head, Dogan et al. (2010) identi- fied this dismemberment, at least in part, as an aggressive mutilation. However, due to the removal of the hands, an attempt to clean up the scene, and the fact that the perpetra- tor attempted to break the edges of the squat toilet to widen the opening for disposal of the elements, Dogan et al. (2010) agreed that the mutilation could also be considered defensive. Homicide by decapitation has also been identified as aggressive mutilation (as observed in several cases in this volume). Konopka et al. (2007, 2016) cited a case in which a mother chopped the necks of her two daughters with an ax, murdering them and nearly decapitating one.

Necromanic mutilation, the least common modern category, may be associated with necrophilia or carried out with the purpose of using a body part as a symbol, trophy, or fetish. The death of the corpse used in this instance may not necessarily result from homi- cide. A very clear example is described by Ehrlich et al. (2000) in which a male perpetrator

184 12. THE PATTERN OF VIOLENCE AND AGGRESSION

DISMEMBERMENTS

committed at least 12 acts of necrophilia or paraphilia. He would specifically break into cemeteries to gain access to the corpses and admitted that he would often feel inclined to perform the acts after leaving his court mandated psychiatric appointments intended to help him with this inclination. In six of the instances the perpetrator either severed the breasts or skinned the trunk of the corpses and placed the skin on his naked body for sex- ual stimulation. In one instance he removed a limb. He also gained sexual gratification through covering himself in burial shrouds and/or lying in the coffins. To further clarify this category, Mellor (2016) uses the term necromutilophilia for individuals gaining plea- sure from the mutilation of corpses and specifies the term necromutilomania for cases where mutilation of corpses is compulsive but not accompanied with homicide. According to Ehrlich et al. (2000), almost all necromaniac mutilations are committed by males. In their review of nine cases from German speaking countries, there was only one instance of a female perpetrator.

More recently, Persaud and Häkkänen-Nyholm (2012) included a fifth category, com- munication. Dismemberment as a means of communication includes those killings that are associated with organized crime in which the mutilation is a means of sending a message. Evidence of mutilation has been identified in the prehistoric and historic record. Motives for such dismemberments in these early contexts typically revolved around powerasser- tion and/or superstition (Klaus and Toyne, 2016). For example, public executions by “dis- ruption” that were carried out by chaining each limb to four horses to be pulled apart in four directions (quartering) symbolized the power of the State. Such executions were reserved for enemies of the State serving as a symbol for others not to question their rule. As described by Klaus and Toyne (2016), dismemberment within Moche contexts involved combat, and capturing prisoners for public display and sacrifice. These behaviors were interpreted from mural and ceramic images, such as paintings depicting Moche warriors leading a line of nude prisoners with a rope tied to their necks, images depicting deep incisions on the penises and legs of prisoners suggesting torture, and images of male cap- tives surrounded by severed heads and limbs (Klaus and Toyne, 2016). Cut marks exam- ined by Klaus and Toyne (2016) on remains from Huaca de la Luna, Peru, are suggestive of mutilation around the eyes, nose, cheeks, lips, scalp, hands, and feet, and possible muti- lation of the genitals. These patterns, held during a ritualistic display, would have likely had a bloody and intimidating effect on the victims and bystanders; and therefore, served to reinforce the State’s power.

Recent modern-day examples include the dismemberments carried out during the armed conflict in Colombia in which dismemberment via machetes and axes was a widespread form of torture to instill fear in rural populations by paramilitary groups (see Chapter 2: Dismemberment of Victims in Colombia: A Perspective From Practice). In many of the cases, the dismemberment was the actual cause of death as no other evidence of trauma was evi- dent and has been confirmed by numerous eyewitness accounts (Morcillo-Méndez and Campos, 2012). Dismemberment also served the purpose as a concealment mechanism allowing for the burial and nonburial disposal of a body (López and Umaña, 2007). Pachar Lucio (2015) has noted the increase in the number of mutilated and dismembered bodies in Mexico and Central American countries of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador related to an increase in criminal activities of narcotrafficking, paramilitary groups, and other gang activities (see Chapters 3 and 4: Dismemberment in Brazil: From Early Colonization to

185CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMINAL DISMEMBERMENTS

DISMEMBERMENTS

Present Days; Postmortem Criminal Mutilation in Panama). The motive behind these dis- memberments is to either send a message (e.g., intimidation, settling of scores) to rival crim- inals or of a psychological, psychiatric, and symbolic etiology exhibiting mutilations of the tongue, genitals, decapitation, removal of the face, scalping, and signs of torture evidenced by placing these in public places or using them as trophies (Pachar Lucio, 2015; see Chapter 4: Postmortem Criminal Mutilation in Panama).

According to Rajs et al. (1998) and Konopka et al. (2016), the two most common forms of dismemberment are defensive and aggressive. These tend to be unplanned, disorga- nized, committed by someone known to the victim, and often influenced by alcohol and/ or substance abuse (Rajs et al., 1998; Konopka et al., 2016). Cases of criminal mutilation are not systematically reported; as such, there are few available for study and the case reviews that do exist are focused on developed countries. Therefore, these trends may be influ- enced by cultural factors not readily accounted for in the literature (Corzine et al., 1999; Salfati and Park, 2007).

MODES AND PATTERNS OF DISMEMBERMENT TRAUMA

Rainwater (2015) provides a recent review of the modes of dismemberment, summariz- ing dismemberment trauma into three categories. These include disarticulation around the joints, transection of bone via chopping, and transection of bone via sawing. Disarticulation around the joints is typically characterized by cut marks around major joints. This mode has been considered evidence of the perpetrator having some anatomical knowledge. An example of transection via sawing is discussed later in Chapter 11, Tool Mark Identification on Bone: Best Practice (see case example 1, Laura Ackerson), where a power saw was utilized. A unique example of a transection via chopping is described in Chapter 11, Tool Mark Identification on Bone: Best Practice of this volume (case example 2), in which a shovel was used to remove the head of the victim and arms at the shoulders. Transection of the bone via sawing was the most common mode of dismember- ment observed among the 21 cases presented in this volume. Rainwater’s classification, transection via chopping, may be more appropriately described with the term corto- contundente or incised-blunt injuries that are produced in chopping transections by a heavy weapon with a sharp cutting edge, such as axes, machetes, shovels, heavy knives, and boat propellers (Di Maio and Dana, 2003; Chapter 11: Tool Mark Identification on Bone: Best Practice).

Mutilation encompasses both disarticulation and any removal of body parts. Skin may also be removed in an attempt to remove tattoos, digits, genitalia, and breasts. The removal of tattoos and/or digits is consistent with defensive mutilation where the perpe- trator is motivated by the desire to hinder identification. For example, in a historic 1935 double murder committed by Dr. Buck Ruxton, investigators reported that fingerprints and scars had been severed from the victims in an attempt to hinder identification (https://www.nlm.nih.gov/visibleproofs/galleries/cases/ruxton.html). Mutilation of the genitalia and/or breasts is consistent with offensive mutilations where lust/sexual desire may be a motivating factor (see Chapter 4: Postmortem Criminal Mutilation in Panama).

186 12. THE PATTERN OF VIOLENCE AND AGGRESSION

DISMEMBERMENTS

Aggressive mutilations are often accompanied by the presence of multiple injuries, defen- sive wounds, symbolic cuts to the face or particular body parts (Rajs et al., 1998).

PSYCHIATRIC ASPECTS

Defensive and aggressive dismemberments are typically disorganized, whereas offen- sive dismemberments are more commonly performed by an organized perpetrator. Rajs et al. (1998) found that defensive dismemberments were likely to be influenced by alcohol and/or substance abuse and most of the perpetrators had been under psychiatric care. Aggressive mutilations were found to be committed by individuals with psychotic tenden- cies, such as schizophrenia or affective disorders (Rajs et al., 1998). This is consistent with the matricide case reported by Dogan et al. (2010). Offensive mutilations are associated with a history of criminal activity including rape, arson, assault, battery, and cruelty to animals (Rajs et al., 1998).

Interestingly, one study found an increase in admittance of schizophrenic patients to psychiatric hospitals during the summer months with a peak occurring in June and July (Hare and Walter, 1978). Other studies have identified seasonal variation in other mental illnesses including bipolar disorder with manic/hypomanic symptoms peaking around the fall equinox and depressive symptoms peaking in months surrounding the winter solstice in bipolar I disorder (Akhter et al., 2013). Holmes (2017) identifies psychopathic personality as part of the suite of antisocial personality disorders that show traits of self- centeredness, absence of empathy, control over others, liability to brutal violence, and risk to others, which could predispose them to dismember without hesitation, revulsion, or remorse. Dismemberment by psychopaths is executed in a cold, dispassionate manner that differentiates them from those preceded by anger or rage (Holmes, 2017). These cases con- ducted by psychopathy and other personality disorders may not be associated to individuals labeled as mentally ill as these disorders do not disable the perpetrator, but instead those around them are the ones who suffer the consequences to their symptoms (Holmes, 2017). Another dimension in civilian contexts is that dismemberment/mutilation in homicide cases, the perpetrator is known to the victim while unknown in nonhomicide cases (Konopka et al., 2007, 2016; Holmes, 2017).

CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS

Corzine et al. (1999) argue that aggression is a culturally encoded behavior and there- fore, may lead to varying homicide patterns within different cultural contexts. Salfati and Park (2007) reviewed 70 cases in South Korea and found that compared with Western homicides, homicides in South Korea are less likely to involve an offender and a victim who have close ties. The authors hypothesize that this is due to a cultural value of interde- pendence and harmony with significant others. Therefore, we can hypothesize that dismemberment patterns may also vary cross-culturally.

Overall, necromaniac mutilations are considered rare (Rajs et al., 1998). However, this trend varies culturally. Labuschange (2004) and Steyn and Brits (see Chapter 5:

187CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS

DISMEMBERMENTS

Dismemberment in South Africa: Case Studies) report on several South African cases in which human body parts were mixed with other ingredients or used alone to produce Muti. Muti, in the traditional belief system of the region, is considered “strong medicine” and human body parts are a highly regarded ingredient because it is believed they possess the essence of life and are very powerful. Steyn and Brits (see Chapter 5: Dismemberment in South Africa: Case Studies), suggest that the most likely cause of dismemberment in South Africa is the Muti trade. These dismemberments are primarily via decapitation, family mem- bers are often the victims, and the patterns suggest that there is preplanning involved (see Chapter 5: Dismemberment in South Africa: Case Studies). It should be noted that soft tissue, such as the breasts and genitalia are also used for Muti and will likely not leave evidence on bone.

Further, while defensive mutilations predominate in the European case reviews as well as in the North Carolina cases, mutilations committed by organized crime for the purpose of communication are more common in Latin America (see Chapters 2�4). Interestingly, Sweden showed the greatest frequency of offensive and aggressive mutilations.

META-ANALYSIS OF GEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS OF DISMEMBERMENTS USING PUBLISHED DATA

A meta-analysis to examine geographic patterns in dismemberments was conducted on combined data from the literature including Poland (n 5 23, Konopka et al., 2007), Sweden (n 5 21, Rajs et al., 1998), United Kingdom (n 5 80, Black et al., 2017), and the United States (n 5 11, Chapter 11: Tool Mark Identification on Bone: Best Practice). A Pearson Chi- square, which uses the observed and expected cell frequencies, was used to test whether motive of dismemberments differed among countries and to examine for variation in vic- tim profiles, perpetrator relation to victim, and mode of dismemberment using the cate- gorical response analysis platform in JMP 13.0 (SAS Institute Inc., 2016).

Results

The Pearson Chi-square results show that there are significant differences in motives among the different countries (Pearson Chi-square 5 52.61, p-value 5 , 0.0001). Table 12.1 presents the frequency count of motive by country and shows that defensive dismember- ments are by far the most common. However, Sweden had a greater frequency of offensive and aggressive dismemberments than any of the countries. Proportionally the United States has the greatest frequency of multiple motives of dismemberment per case. These country specific differences can be better visualized in the share chart (Fig. 12.1), which is calcu- lated by dividing each count by the total number of responses and represents the fre- quency divided by response total (JMP 13 Consumer Research. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc, 2016).

Differences in frequency were also found regarding perpetrator profiles among the countries (Pearson Chi-square 5 12.74, p-value 5 0.05). By far, males were the most common perp (see Fig. 12.2 share chart). However, when we examined each individual

188 12. THE PATTERN OF VIOLENCE AND AGGRESSION

DISMEMBERMENTS

sample, Poland differed significantly from both Sweden and the UK (p-value 5 0.03, p-value 5 0.05, respectively) having more female perpetrators. The relation of the perpetra- tor to the victim did not differ significantly among the countries with the perpetrator being known to the victim as the most common measure (Pearson Chi-square 5 0.87, p-value 5 0.853, see Table 12.2 for frequencies).

There was no significant difference in the victim profile (Pearson Chi-square 5 10.35, p-value 5 0.11) even though the United Kingdom has a greater frequency of male victims; however, this is most likely due to the larger sample size. (see Table 12.3).

Share chart Motive of mutilation

Poland 23 21

80

12

1 2 3 4 5

Sweden

UK

USA

Reporting country

FIGURE 12.1 Frequency of mutilation type by country 1 5 defensive, 2 5 offensive, 3 5 aggressive, 4 5 necromanic, 5 5 multiple types.

TABLE 12.1 Frequency Comparisons for Motive of Dismemberment

Frequency Defensive Offensive Aggressive Necromanic Multiple

Total

Responses

Reporting country Poland 17 3 2 1 0 23

73.9% 13.0% 8.7% 4.3% 0.0%

Reporting country Sweden 10 6 4 1 0 21

47.6% 28.6% 19.0% 4.8% 0.0%

Reporting country UK 66 2 5 1 6 80

82.5% 2.5% 6.3% 1.3% 7.5%

Reporting country USA 6 0 0 0 6 12

50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50.0%

Share chart Perpetrator profile: 2 or 1

Reporting country

Poland

1 2 3

23

21

80

11

Sweden UK

USA

FIGURE 12.2 Frequency of perpetrator profile 1 5 female, 2 5 male, 3 5 unknown.

189META-ANALYSIS OF GEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS OF DISMEMBERMENTS USING PUBLISHED DATA

DISMEMBERMENTS

Interestingly, there was a significant difference in mode of dismemberment (e.g., transection or disarticulation) among the countries (Pearson Chi-square 5 16.73, p-value 5 0.01).The majority of the cases were dismemberment by transection with a smaller frequency of disarticulations. However, Poland had the highest frequency of disar- ticulations with 24% and in the United Kingdom100% were transections (see Table 12.4).

TABLE 12.2 Frequencies of Relation of Perpetrator to Victim (1 5 known, 2 5 unknown), * 5 Alpha level 0.05, ** 5 Alpha level 0.1.

Frequency Share Comparisons

Perpetrator Profile: Relation to Victim

1 2 Total Responses Compare Compare Means

Reporting country Poland A 17 6 23

73.9% ** 26.1% **

Sweden B 15 6 21

71.4% ** 28.6% **

UK C 62 18 80

77.5% * 22.5% *

USA D 8 4 12

66.7% ** 33.3% **

* 5 Alpha level 0.1, ** 5 Alpha level 0.05.

TABLE 12.3 Victim Profile (1 5 Female, 2 5 Male, 3 5 Unknown)

Frequency Share

Victim Profile: 2 or 1

1 2 3 Total Responses Compare

Reporting country Poland A 15 8 0 23

65.2% 34.8% 0.0%

Sweden B 11 10 0 21

52.4% 47.6% 0.0%

UK C 34 35 11 80

42.5% 43.8% 13.8%

USA D 7 5 0 12

58.3% 41.7% 0.0%

190 12. THE PATTERN OF VIOLENCE AND AGGRESSION

DISMEMBERMENTS

LESSONS LEARNED

The parallels observed in all of the chapters of diverse geographic origin is that every practitioner begins with a gross examination of the false starts (reported by everyone in this volume) and cross-sections. Auxiliary analyses were applied by almost everyone namely SEM and histology through which it was possible to find evidence of the offend- ing implement as well the environment the victim occupied at some point. In Brazil, mac- roscopic analysis appears to be the only analyses performed on the skeleton and in Central American practice neither auxiliary analyses nor skeletal examinations were con- ducted. This may be a product of a lack of available resources and collaborative multidis- ciplinary opportunities.

Per contra, France, Italy, and the United States show more detailed ancillary analyses. As such, Delabarde and Ludes in Chapter 7, The Potential of Histological Analysis in Dismemberment Cases, provide best practice for histological methods, Ross and Radisch (see Chapter 11: Tool Mark Identification on Bone: Best Practice) and Adams and Rainwater (see Chapter 10: Intentional Body Dismemberment Following Nonhomicidal Deaths: A Retrospective Study of Body Packer Cases in New York City) for digital micros- copy, and Amadasi and colleagues (see Chapter 8: Dismemberment and Tool Mark Analysis on Bone: A Microscopic Analysis of the Walls of Cut Marks) describe an experi- ment to achieve more reliable results proving that future research is necessary. The identi- fication of the instrument used to mutilate the body has been demonstrated to be dependent upon the quality of crime scene protocols and on the recovery of suspect objects, which can later be compared with witness marks found on the victim. Multiple instruments are reported, such as heavy sharp edged tools, long, heavy tools (e.g., machetes), several types of knives, and saws. The majority of the lesions are a combination of sharp force and blunt force trauma leading Ross and Radisch to inclusively discuss the

TABLE 12.4 Frequency in Mode of Dismemberment (1 5 Transection, 2 5 Disarticulation, 3 5 Unknown)

Frequency Share Comparisons

Mode or Manner of Dismemberment

1 2 3

Total

Responses Compare

Compare

Means

Reporting country

Poland A 13 4 0 17

76.5% ** 23.5% C** 0.0% **

Sweden B 1 0 0 1

100.0% ** 0.0% ** 0.0% **

UK C 48 1 0 49

98.0% A* 2.0% * 0.0% *

USA D 10 0 1 11

90.9% ** 0.0% ** 9.1% **

* 5 Alpha level 0.05, ** 5 Alpha level 0.1.

191LESSONS LEARNED

DISMEMBERMENTS

Latin terminology corto-contundente, which they consider a more accurate descriptor of these types of lesions as opposed to the descriptor “transection via chopping” used by Rainwater (2015) and for which we are recommending inclusion in our standard trauma nomenclature.

Decapitation was a common element reported in approximately half of the cases pre- sented in this volume, which is a significant finding especially if we take into account that it is the modus operandi of terrorists, such as Al Qaeda. Most of the decapitations were post- mortem even if in some of the cases, the decapitation itself could have been the cause of death. Almost every chapter addresses the underlying motives for the dismemberment, which differ between the violent and less violent countries represented. Inconsistent with the meta-analyses presented above, males and females were proportionately the victim of dismemberment in the 21 cases presented throughout this volume. Adults were more fre- quently the victims of mutilation, where only two out of 21 victims were subadults.

Perpetrators are known generally when there is a conviction. Otherwise, they remain unknown, which precludes any inference to be made from the cases outlined in this vol- ume where in only a few of the cases the perpetrator was caught. Moreover, it is more common that cases remain unsolved in violent countries where there are many more vic- tims of homicide, limited resources, and where the government priorities are not directed toward the dead.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

As criminal mutilations are not systematically reported and most of the data available derive from developed countries, there is a gap in the data and a deficiency toward under- standing global trends. For example, the meta-analysis included in this chapter is primar- ily comprised of European and one American data set. However, as demonstrated throughout the chapters in this volume, a slightly different trend is represented in the Americas (not including the United States), where the primary motivation for dismember- ment is for the purpose of communication—the fifth type of dismemberment, identified by Persaud and Häkkänen-Nyholm (2012), that we recommend utilizing as it accurately describes a very specific motive observed in modern developing countries. Therefore, we recommend the development of best practices and encourage forensic practitioners to report cases of mutilation. Further, reporting of these cases varies considerably. For exam- ple, often information regarding the mode and tools utilized are not included, making global comparisons difficult if not impossible to make.

However, the 21 cases (not including the Australian context) presented in this volume allow us to make some general inferences. Are dismemberments a rare occurrence? As noted by Ross and Radisch in Chapter 2, Dismemberment of Victims in Colombia: A Perspective From Practice, there is a trend in the literature to claim that criminal dismem- berment is a rare occurrence, and they cite that only Quatrehomme (2007) has stated that postmortem dismemberment was not an isolated event. The insights from the eight coun- tries highlighted in this book unsurprisingly show that in the group of violent countries (e.g., Colombia, Brazil, Central America, and South Africa), dismemberments are common, whereas elsewhere they appear to be relatively rare events, although Ross and Radisch

192 12. THE PATTERN OF VIOLENCE AND AGGRESSION

DISMEMBERMENTS

report 11 cases for a period of 7 years in North Carolina (2011�17). However, Ross and Radisch also suggest that the claim that criminal dismemberment is a rare occurrence may be related to how these types of cases are documented and reported. A common denomi- nator appears to be an underestimation of these types of cases and unreliable statistics. For example, Sanabria reports that 7000 bodies were recovered between 2005 and 2017, but the percentage of dismemberments is unreported. Steyn and Brits state that Muti related killings happen with relatively high frequency in South Africa. Overall, these cases are underestimated and challenging to quantify. Finally, the practitioners in this volume demonstrate that Locard’s exchange principle—that “every contact leaves a trace”—still holds true today.

References

Akhter, A., Fiedorowicz, J.G., Zhang, T., Potash, J.B., Cavanaugh, J., Solomon, D.A., et al., 2013. Seasonal variation of manic depressive symptoms in bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disorder 15 (4), 377�384.

Black, S., Rutty, G., Hainsworth, S., Thomson, G., 2017. Appendix II. In: Black, S., Rutty, G., Hainsworth, S., Thomson, G. (Eds.), Criminal Dismemberment. Forensic and Investigative Analysis. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 200�202.

Corzine, J., Huff-Corzine, L., Whitt, H.P., 1999. Cultural and subcultural theories of homicide. In: Smith, M.D., Zahn, M.A. (Eds.), Homicide: A Sourcebook of Social Research. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp. 58�71.

Di Maio, V., Dana, S., 2003. Manual de patologı́aforense. Ediciones Diaz de Santos S.A, pp. 108�109. Dogan, K.H., Demirci, S., Deniz, I., Erkol, Z., 2010. Decapitation and dismemberment of the corpse: a matricide

case. J. Forensic Sci. 55 (2), 542�545. Ehrlich, E., Rothschild, M.A., Pluisch, F., Schneider, V., 2000. An extreme case of necrophilia. Legal Med. 2 (4),

224�226. Klaus, H.D., Toyne, J.M., 2016. Ritual of violence in ancient Andes. In: Klaus, H.D., Toyne, J.M. (Eds.), Ritual

Violence in the Ancient Andes: Reconstructing Sacrifice on the North Coast of Peru. University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 29�63.

Häkkänen-Nyholm, H., Weizmann-Henelius, G., Salenius, S., Lindberg, N., Repo-Tiihonen, E., 2009. Homicides with mutilation of the victim’s body. J. Forensic Sci. 54 (4), 933�937.

Hare, E.H., Walter, S.D., 1978. Seasonal variation in admission of pyschatric patients and its relation to seasonal variation in their births. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 32, 47�52.

Holmes, D., 2017. Psychology and dismemberment. In: Black, S., Rutty, G., Hainsworth, S., Thomson, F. (Eds.), Criminal Dismemberment. Forensic and Investigation Analysis. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 27�39.

JMP, 1989�2016. Version 13.0. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC. Konopka, T., Bolechała, F., Strona, M., Kopacz, P., 2016. Homicides with corpse dismemberment in the material

collected by the Department of Forensic Medicine, Krakow, Poland. ArchiwumMedycynySadowej I Kryminologii 66 (4), 220�234.

Konopka, T., Strona, M., Bolechała, F., Kunz, J., 2007. Corpse dismemberment in the material collected by the department of forensic medicine, Cracow, Poland. Legal Med. 9, 1�13.

Labuschange, G., 2004. Features and investigative implications of muti murder in South Africa. J. Invest. Psychol. Offend. Profil. 1, 191�206.

López, A.M.G., Umaña, A.P., 2007. Who is missing? Problems in the application of forensic archaeology and anthropology in Colombia’s conflict. In: Ferllini (Ed.), Forensic Archaeology and Human Rights Violations. Charles C Thomas, Springfield, pp. 170�204.

Mellor, L., 2016. Mincing words: refining the language and interpretation of mutilation. In: Mellor, L., Aggrawal, A., Hickey, E.W. (Eds.), UnderstandingNecrophilia: A Global Multidisciplinary Perspective. Cognella, San Diego, CA, pp. 25�39.

Morcillo-Méndez, M.D., Campos, I.Y., 2012. Dismemberment: cause of death in the Colombian armed conflict. Torture 22 (Suppl. 1), 5�13.

193REFERENCES

DISMEMBERMENTS

National Academy of Science Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Sciences Community, National Research Council, 2009. Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

Pachar Lucio, J.V., 2015. La investigaciónpericialforense de los cuerposmutilados. Revista Ciencias Forenses de Honduras 1 (2), 20�33.

Persaud, R., Häkkänen-Nyholm H., 2012. The psychology of corpse dismemberment. The motivation behind the most grotesque crimes. The Blog. Huffington Post. Available from: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dr-raj- persaud/the-psychology-of-corpse-dismemberment_b_1577919.html (accessed 17/02/2018.).

Püschel, K., Koops, E., 1987. Dismemberment and mutilation. Archiv fur Kriminologie 180 (1�2), 28�40. Quatrehomme, G., 2007. A strange case of dismemberment. In: Brickley, M.B., Ferllini, R. (Eds.), Forensic

Anthropology: Case Studies From Europe. Charles C Thomas, Springfield, pp. 99�119. Rainwater, C.W., 2015. Three modes of dismemberment: disarticulation around the joints, transection bone via

chopping, and transection of bone via sawing. In: Passalacqua, N.V., Rainwater, C.W. (Eds.), Skeletal Trauma Analysis: Case Studies in Context, first ed. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 222�245.

Rajs, J., Lundström, M., Broberg, M., Lidberg, L., Lindquist, O., 1998. Criminal mutilation of the human body in Sweden—A thirty-year medico-legal and forensic psychiatric study. J. Forensic Sci. 43 (3), 563�580.

Salfati, C.G., Park, J., 2007. An analysis of Korean homicide crime-scene actions. J. Inter. Viol. 22 (11), 1448�1470. Sea, J., Beauregard, E., 2016. Mutilation in Korean homicide: an exploratory study. J. Inter. Viol. 1�15. Ziemke, E., 1918. Ueber die kriminelleZerstückelung von Leichen und die SicherstellungihrerIdentität.

VjsschrgeruchtlMed 56, 270�318.

194 12. THE PATTERN OF VIOLENCE AND AGGRESSION

DISMEMBERMENTS