In the Results section, comparisons in the six main themes are presented between No revenge and Revenge subjects subsequently.
I. Factors in general (causes, attitude and feelings towards the murder, feelings observed by forensic experts, planning)
Causes of homicide
In the ‘No Revenge-group’, three main reasons for the offence of the suspects were found: 1) Argument escalation, 2) Assisted suicide and 3) 'Saving' the other from a life that is worse than death. Escalation of an argument in a relationship in which self-defense ("I wanted him to stop") ended fatally for the person who initiated the physical violence, assisted suicide where it is unclear whether the other person also had a death wish (but not completely implausible) and, more frequently in this sample, 'saving' the other from a life that is worse than death (stemming from psychosis, culturally-colored experience, such as the influence of a Djinn, the Devil or witchcraft, or a supposedly otherwise hopeless situation) as well as psychodynamic factors such as symbiosis, boundary dissolution, denial and projection (immature defense mechanisms).
In the ‘Revenge’ group, two reasons were found: 1) The feeling 'I am not the only one who needs to feel pain' and 2) the feeling of disrespect which cannot be tolerated (‘who does not want to listen, has to feel the consequences’). One feels abandoned, humiliated, let down, and unappreciated. A partner who threatens to leave, (alleged) cheating, doubts about biological paternity and an accumulation of problems are often the immediate cause.
Table 3 shows some examples of statements made by the suspects.
Attitude and feelings towards the accused
Strikingly, in the ‘No Revenge-group’ suspects seem convinced that they can decide that the life of the victim is no longer worth living under the perceived circumstances. They were presumably convinced that they were doing the right thing because of a distorted perception of reality: the victim's fate was already terrible (for instance because of the work of the Devil), and fear and despair prospered. Children with disabilities in combination with exhaustion of the parent together with the belief that others would not be able to take care of them, can also be a non-psychotic route leading to the same consideration. Two cases appear to be outliers; during an escalated argument, one suspect had a reliving of a previous traumatic experience and in one case 'assisted suicide' was offered to a seriously ill partner. In the ‘No Revenge’ group, intense feelings of guilt, regret, sadness, remorse, and anger at oneself came to the fore. People did not know what to do.
In the ‘Revenge’ group, suspects experienced an accumulation of traumas and other problems. Violence was almost always experienced as a sort of settlement of an interpersonal score. Feeling abandoned is often the common denominator. People were angry, offended, felt ridiculed and humiliated. They felt locked out and rejected by the world. People experienced betrayal (e.g., catching the partner having extramarital sex, or doubts about biological paternity). It is noticeable that self-esteem is often linked to the relationship with a partner, in cases where the partner is murdered out of revenge. The ‘Revenge group’ frequently mentioned anger. Two suspects showed no remorse or guilt. One was happy that his partner was dead and that he could move on. Another said that he did not deserve a prison sentence. One person mentioned that speaking about the murder made him feel positive. Another speaks of a positive turning-point: "If it hadn't happened then, I would still be in this shit. I am a nicer person now, I am open and dare to open my mouth now. I won't let anyone walk all over me anymore, if my girlfriend were to tell me something now, then there's the door." Another says it feels good to talk about sad things from the past. Sometimes it is also not so clear how the person concerned feels about the charges, for example: 'it seems to go past him' (observation made by the forensic expert).
Feelings observed by the forensic experts
In the ‘No Revenge group’, forensic experts ascribed authenticity to observed feelings. Mentioned are sadness, fear, upheaval, grief and feelings of guilt that are almost unbearable and are pushed away with anger.
In the ‘Revenge group’ it was frequently noted by forensic experts that little shame and suffering were shown. Some people made jokes and the vibe was light-hearted. Emotions such as sadness, however, did not appear. Relatively often, people appeared averse to their own emotional world. Some felt wronged and felt sorry for themselves and for what happened to them.
Planning
Planning was denied by almost everyone. It should, therefore, be mentioned that the suspects were still waiting for the trial. One may fear being put at a disadvantage if one confesses to planning.
In the ‘No- Revenge group’, there was no clear planning in seven cases. In two cases, planning is plausible because a method of committing murder/suicide was searched for on the internet. In one case, the suspect had already given signals that something was going wrong (this may indicate not so much that someone was planning, yet the offense did not come completely out of the blue).
In the ‘Revenge’ group there was no clear planning in four cases. Two suspects prepared carefully (scrupulously) and this makes planning very plausible. In one case, planning was plausible because a method was searched for on the internet. In two cases planning was denied even though there was a threat through text messages and e-mail. In one case there was a suicide note, but it was undated, making it difficult to prove planning.
II. Childhood and parenting style in family of origin
Family of origin, childhood
In both groups parenting styles were experienced as inconsistent: one authoritarian, the other accommodating and safe, or one hot-tempered and the other one calm. Little attention was paid to the individual and to the emotional needs. Physical abuse took place in both groups.
In the ‘No- Revenge group’, it is noticeable there was a limited mutual involvement in the family of origin. Parents died when the suspects were still young, or they suffered from psychological complaints as a result of which little affection and safety could be given. Systemic problems were described a number of times (e.g., extramarital relationships, a lot of fighting between parents or a child who feels that he is standing between the parents as a mediator). Several people struggled with attachment problems and behavioral problems at a young age, had few friends or experienced bullying at school. Being bullied at school is mentioned in half of the cases. Being bullied by a stepmother and emigration/acculturation problems were both mentioned once.
In contrast to the ‘No Revenge’ cases, being bullied by peers in school is hardly a recurring theme in the Revenge cases. Separation of parents, early childhood trauma (including sexual and physical abuse) and alcohol use is reported. Status, norms and values were important themes for various people involved and feelings of belittlement and humiliation are experienced. In addition, in one of the families it is described that the person concerned may have been spoiled, which may have contributed to a low frustration tolerance.
III. Personality (personality traits, defense mechanisms, conscience, frustration-tolerance)
Personality traits (identified by experts)
In the 'No Revenge group' a borderline personality organization [20] was identified three times. Furthermore, introversion was discussed as well as internalizing problems, sub-assertiveness and avoidant and dependent traits. There is evidence of an avoidant attachment style. Feelings of emptiness, suggestibility, fear of abandonment, an erratic emotional life with a poorly-matured identity, and mood swings were also identified. Intimacy problems and a tendency to take on the victim role are also mentioned, as well as more neurotic problems (e.g. nervousness). In addition, indications of a psychotic personality organization were found. This can partly be derived from the failing reality-testing that was reported frequently in this group, as well as schizoid traits, and a symbiotic relationship tendency (all of these can be indicator of a psychotic personality organization). In several cases, there was a psychological fusion with the other person or a symbiotic relationship. Aggression was often inhibited with a passive aggressive expression of dissatisfaction. In addition, drugs seemed to play a role sometimes, which means that failing reality-testing could in that case also be caused by drug use.
In the Revenge group, egocentrism is mentioned no less than eight times. Passive aggressive traits, dependent and avoidant traits, perfectionism, rigidity, lack of close contact, jealousy, inadequate emotion regulation, and impulsivity were also mentioned. Antisocial traits and a tendency to externalize were mentioned twice. In particular, there could be covert narcissism (such as denial of one's own hostility and suspicion). More primary narcissism could also be deduced in one case from the description of a socially skilled façade. Narcissism manifests itself as well in materialism and search for power and prestige, and in very high vulnerabilities, egocentrism, fear of belittlement, self-centeredness, low empathy, need for recognition, difficulty with authority, low frustration tolerance, identity problems, black- and- white thinking, fantasies of grandeur and a lack of mentalization. Contact with others was instrumentally colored.
Defense Mechanisms
Defense mechanisms that were the same in both groups: splitting, projective identification, affect isolation, externalization, idealization and devaluation, rationalization, and denial. For example, one man in the No-Revenge group denied his partner's death (and his fault) and became angry and sad when confronted.
Furthermore, in the ‘No-Revenge group’ acting out, externalizing, rationalization, alienation, projection, reaction formation, repression, passive-aggressive complaining was present. Although there is a mixture of primitive and developed defenses, immature defense-mechanisms predominate.
In the ‘Revenge group’, defense-mechanisms as paranoid projection and vilification were seen. More primitive defenses were also identified. In one case, one could speak of a severely fluctuating level of insight and judgement.
Conscience (identified by experts)
In the ‘No-Revenge’ group, there was no mentioning of a disturbed function of conscience. Reasonable, intact, strict or punitive functions of conscience were described.
In the Revenge group, conscience was described as flawed (only one exception). It is insufficiently internalized, very limited, lacunar and built up from outside rules commandments (e.g. faith), or it consists of a rational awareness of norms and values and fails on an emotional and behavioral level.
Frustration-tolerance (identified by experts)
In the ‘No- Revenge group’, the level of frustration-tolerance varied; from moderate, low to strong control, and even inhibited. There seem to be two types in the No-Revenge group: an impulsive group with low frustration-tolerance and a group in which this is less evident due to aggression-inhibition. The latter group may be an extra risk because of unpredictability. Risk mainly arises when coping fails because 'suddenly' a completely different side of the victim emerges.
In the ‘Revenge group’, frustration-tolerance was usually rated as low. None of the subjects had an aggression breakthrough during the research itself. However, an emotional sensitivity and fragility is often observed. In one case, the frustration tolerance was estimated as being held back: 'Frustrations built up and form the breeding ground of anger'. In some of the cases, frustrations were visible (and also more externally and verbally focused than in the No-Revenge cases), but they usually did not lead to major outbursts. The frustration-tolerance seemed to be intact somewhat more often than in the No-Revenge group.
IV. Psychological symptoms (psychological complaints and reality testing)
Psychological complaints
Psychotic symptoms regularly played a role in the ‘No-Revenge’ cases. Based on delusions, the suspect has the idea that the victim's life was no longer worth living. In particular, paranoid ideas and delusions of reference and mental disorganization were mentioned. Mood disorders were frequently mentioned in the reports (specifically in at least five of the cases ). Usually it concerns sadness, feelings of powerlessness and desperation, suicidality, sleeping-problems and occasionally an agitated or excited mood. Relationship problems regularly played a role. They either led to a longer lasting pattern of overload or to an acute severe degree of distress. They were specifically mentioned in at least three of the ‘No- Revenge’ cases. Social isolation, acculturation problems, reliving of a previous traumatic experience, problems in the religious sphere, Factitious Disorder Imposed on Another (Munchausen by proxy) and substance use were all mentioned once.
In the ‘Revenge’ cases, the psychotic symptomatology was remarkably absent compared to the ‘No- Revenge’ cases. Depressive symptoms were also mentioned less often (in three out of ten cases). However, personality problems were mentioned more often (particularly the B-cluster in terms of the DSM-IV) and people mentioned more often having no psychological complaints (three times). Substance use and relationship problems were also mentioned more often. Remarkable is that one report mentioned that an extensive mental care history could not reverse a negative trend and another subject already showed a trend of increasing aggression before the homicide.
Reality testing (identified by experts)
Impaired reality testing was often the case in the ‘No- Revenge group’ (in six cases this was regarded as seriously disturbed). Three times undisturbed/intact reality testing was mentioned, one time ‘vulnerable under pressure’.
In the Revenge group, the reality testing was mostly intact; in eight cases this was undisturbed. Dissociative distortions were mentioned twice.
V. Social circumstances (substance use, stress factors)
Substance use at the time of the offense
One case involved alcohol and cannabis use and one case concerned polydrug dependence at the time of the offense in the ‘No- Revenge group’. In the Revenge group, two of the ten cases involved alcohol use at the time of the offense and one case involved a fairly large dose of oxazepam (150 mg).
Stress factors at the time of the offense
The most common stress factors were similar in both groups and concerned financial problems and debts, relationship problems and the threat of divorce, work problems and loss of work, poor social position due to language problems, housing- problems or the threat of eviction, social deprivation, care for a partner or child with health- or psychological problems, somatic problems such as erectile dysfunction causing sexual problems. Often a combination of stressors seemed to be at play. Relationship problems stand out in the Revenge cases.
VI. Correlates (judicial history and intelligence)
Judicial history
In the ‘No- Revenge group’ one drug smuggling and two thefts are mentioned, otherwise nothing in particular. In contrast to this, there is a large degree of differentiation in the ‘Revenge’ group: five have a blank judicial history and others are familiar with insulting the police, violent crimes and attempted manslaughter, theft, drug trafficking, arson, and benefit fraud.
Intelligence (identified by experts)
Intelligence is sometimes examined through test research and other times estimated by the forensic expert based on the conversation with the suspect and the suspects education.
Intelligence did not differ between the groups; the majority of the cases in both groups showed an average intelligence and a few times above average or low average. In both groups mental retardation was identified once.