How Perpetrators Explain Their Crimes: Understanding the Narratives of Male-Male Homicide
Homicide has long been a subject of criminological research, often analysed through statistical and demographic data. However, an emerging field of study delves deeper into the subjective experiences of perpetrators, seeking to understand how they rationalize their violent actions. A recent study by Martín Hernán Di Marco (2022) explores the narratives used by male perpetrators of homicide in Buenos Aires, Argentina, revealing complex psychological and sociocultural mechanisms at play. This article breaks down the key findings of the research, offering an insightful look into the ways these men justify, explain, and make sense of their crimes.
The Role of Narrative in Crime
Narrative criminology suggests that the way people talk about their actions shapes their identity and future behavior. When individuals commit extreme acts of violence, they often construct narratives that allow them to integrate these events into their self-concept. In the context of male-male homicide, these narratives not only provide explanations but also influence how perpetrators engage with penal institutions and broader society.
Eight Types of Homicide Narratives
Di Marco's study identifies eight primary narratives that perpetrators use to explain their crimes. These narratives vary in their focus on agency (whether the individual perceives themselves as in control or not) and the explanatory locus (whether they attribute the crime to personal, familial, social, or situational factors).
1. Rebel (Active Redemption)
This narrative portrays the perpetrator as a strong-willed individual who took control of his fate. The crime is framed as part of a rebellious phase, often linked to rejecting societal norms or family expectations. Redemption comes through personal change, yet the individual maintains a sense of power over their past decisions.
2. Affected (Passive Redemption)
Unlike the rebel narrative, this explanation centers on personal struggles that diminished the individual's control over their actions. These perpetrators often describe themselves as victims of mental illness, substance abuse, or traumatic experiences, suggesting that their crimes were a result of psychological affliction rather than intent.
3. Idiot (Vindication)
In this narrative, blame is placed squarely on the victim, who is portrayed as having provoked the crime through their own actions. The perpetrator sees themselves as someone who reacted justifiably to an offense or betrayal, making the homicide an act of retribution rather than aggression.
4. Either Him or Me (Impasse)
This explanation presents the crime as an unavoidable confrontation. The perpetrator felt they were in a life-or-death situation, with no alternative but to strike first. This narrative is commonly associated with self-defense claims, even if the circumstances of the crime suggest otherwise.
5. Repeating the Story (Familiar Trap)
Here, the perpetrator frames their actions as part of a generational or familial cycle. Many describe coming from violent backgrounds where crime and aggression were normalized. The homicide is depicted as an inevitable outcome of their environment rather than a personal decision.
6. Gang (Complicity)
This narrative focuses on peer influence and group dynamics. The perpetrators often emphasize that they were part of a violent social circle where crime was an expectation rather than a choice. They may acknowledge their involvement but stress the collective nature of their decisions.
7. Betrayed (Veiled Truth)
Some perpetrators present themselves as being deceived or manipulated into committing their crimes. They may suggest that others played a role in pushing them toward violence, either through coercion or deceit, thus shifting some of the responsibility away from themselves.
8. Victim (Fatalism)
This is the most passive of the narratives, where the individual perceives themselves as powerless against fate. The crime is seen as something that was bound to happen due to external forces, such as societal failure, economic struggles, or personal misfortune. The perpetrator assumes little to no agency over their actions.
The Two Paradoxes of Homicide Storytelling
The study identifies two major paradoxes in the way perpetrators discuss their crimes:
Simultaneously Responsible and Not Responsible: Many perpetrators navigate a fine line between acknowledging their involvement in a homicide and distancing themselves from blame. This cognitive dissonance allows them to integrate their crime into their personal narrative while preserving their self-image.
Use of Expert Theories to Justify Violence: Interestingly, many of these men employ psychological and criminological concepts to rationalize their actions. Terms like "trauma," "borderline personality disorder," and "antisocial behaviour" appear in their accounts, demonstrating how they internalize professional discourse to shape their own explanations.
The Sociocultural Context of Male Violence
Masculinity plays a crucial role in shaping these narratives. Many of the perpetrators frame their crimes within the expectations of male dominance, power, and respect. In particular, the "rebel," "gang," and "either him or me" narratives reflect a deep entrenchment in violent masculinity, where aggression is both a survival mechanism and a status symbol.
Implications for Criminal Justice and Rehabilitation
Understanding these narratives is critical for developing more effective interventions within the criminal justice system. Rather than simply punishing offenders, rehabilitation programs must address the cognitive frameworks that allow individuals to justify lethal violence. This means:
Providing psychological support tailored to offenders’ self-perceptions.
Addressing toxic masculinity and its relationship with violence.
Offering alternative narratives through education and mentorship programs.
Simply Put
Homicide perpetrators do not see themselves as mere criminals; they construct elaborate narratives to justify, excuse, or integrate their violent actions into their self-concept. By studying these narratives, we gain a deeper understanding of the social and psychological mechanisms behind violent crime. If we aim to reduce male-male homicide, we must challenge the narratives that sustain it and provide alternative frameworks for identity, responsibility, and change.
References
Thank you for reading! If you’d like a broader look at how culture, politics, and sustainability intersect with mental health, explore our Global Psychology section. We investigate cross-cultural research, international policies, and global challenges to reveal how diverse societies foster collective resilience. Gain a holistic view of human behaviour and see how psychology drives change worldwide.
