Conclusion

This research projected has attempted to shed light on the characteristics of offenders in cases of arson-homicides in the Netherlands. Several aspects of the population have been discussed, both by looking deeper into the characteristics of the arson-homicide offenders and by comparing them to the population of non-arson homicide offenders in the Netherlands. Where possible, the results of the analyses were compared with the results of similar research projects focusing on other geographical regions. The results of the analyses are discussed in the previous chapter, but will be summarized below, in order to present a conclusion by answering the main research question: “Can acts of arson-related homicide be explained primarily as homicidal acts, or are they primarily driven by firesetting behaviour? Or is arson-related homicide a different phenomenon altogether?”. Subsequently, some remarks will be made with regard to the limitations experienced in the conduct of this research, and the implications of the results will be discussed, along with some suggestions for future research.

5.1 Research Findings

The analyses of offenders characteristics, the types of arson used and the intentions and motivations of the offenders in arson-homicides offer a useful guide to placing offenders in the spectrum of arson- and homicide offenders. Based on the results of this research project, it can be concluded that offenders in arson-homicides are predominantly inclined to get involved in homicidal acts, rather than acts of ‘pure’ firesetting. Summarizing the results of the different sub-questions can provide an overview of the phenomenon of arson-homicides in the Netherlands, both in relation to other non-arson homicides or non-lethal arson cases, as well as to arson-homicides in other regions.

From a comparison of the gender- and age distributions between the two different Dutch offender populations it can be observed that there are no significant differences with regard to both these characteristics. However, arson-homicide offenders tend to be somewhat older than non-arson homicide offenders (30-39 years as opposed to 18-29 years of age). In Australia, this was the other way around: arson-homicide offenders tend to be younger than non-arson homicide offenders (Ferguson et al., 2015). Eleven offenders were involved in cases in which the use of smoke or fire were registered as the primary modus operandi, and for twenty percent of the arson-homicide offenders, the primary modus operandi remained unknown or was not made public. However, the murder weapons most often used by arson-homicide offenders are firearms, and the offenders choosing these methods typically choose to commit secondary arson after committing the homicide, or getting away from the crime scene in a

45 flight vehicle that they burn down at a later moment. These methods of violence and types of arson were commonly seen in criminal homicides, which was the most common type of arson-homicide. The prevalence of criminal homicides differs between non-arson- and arson- homicides: 60% of the offenders in arson-homicides were involved in a criminal homicide, while this was the case for 24% of the non-arson homicide offenders. Other differences between these two groups of offenders were seen with regard to the prevalence of domestic homicides and incidents occurring after a fight or argument: both these types were less commonly committed by arson-homicide offenders compared to non-arson homicide offenders. Offenders in domestic arson-homicides tend to resort to ante-mortem- rather than post-mortem firesetting.Overall, ante-mortem firesetting was used by eleven offenders, seven of which committed primary arson, and four of which burned their victim alive. Compared between different regions, the ratio of ante-mortem to post-mortem types of arson differs largely: in the US, 30% of arson-homicide cases involved ante-mortem burning (Sapp & Huff, 1996), while this was true for 64% in the city of Chicago (Drake & Block, 2003) and 68% in Australia (Davies & Mouzos, 2015).

5.2 Shortcomings and Future Research

Some pitfalls for this design can be identified. Most importantly, prior research on the topic of arson-homicides is very scarce, making it difficult to compare the present methodological framework with preliminary research designs that have proven feasible and appropriate. The same line of reasoning is applicable to the literature review on which the main research question is based. Moreover, answering the (sub-)research questions proved to be rather challenging. Analysing the intention and motivations of offenders is difficult to due partial- or complete non-disclosure by offenders and speculation in newspaper articles. This leads to missing values in the dataset and thus less valid information to base the analyses upon. Despite these difficulties, some useful insights have been gathered through this research project. The conclusion that arson-homicides can primarily be explained as homicidal acts has implies that preventive strategies should be aimed primarily at homicidal offenders rather than firesetters. However, many details have yet to be identified. Suggestions for further research include a more elaborate analyses of the demographics and backgrounds of the offenders, and, for instance, research into the meaning of fire for different ethnic or cultural populations that offenders might come from. If anything, this research project has shown that the population of arson-homicide offenders allows for additional research to deepen knowledge and facilitate the development of prevention- or risk management strategies against homicidal acts.

46