Violent men: ordinary and deviant

This article deals with discourses of intimate partner violence and is based on interviews with professionals who meet violent men. The professionals emphasized the importance of men taking unreserved responsibility for their violent behavior. Intimate partner violence was viewed not only as "power and control" but as the result of complex situations and interplays. The discourses presented an ambivalent explanation of violent men as both ordinary and deviant. They were understood as having a strained background, but to be rather ordinary, often functioning well at work and in society. Yet, they have nonstandard views of women, act deviant in their communication and interplay with others, and cannot cope with certain situations in intimate relationships. Based on the interviews, men inclined to partner violence may be generalized as those who: attack immediately, explode unexpectedly, or ultimately become aggressive. The discussion challenges unreflected discourses as means for change when counteracting violence.     

Theory and practice in interviewing young children: A study of Norwegian police interviews 1985–2002

Abstract

Has the increased public and professional awareness of the challenges of interviewing children in forensic contexts led to changes and improvements in police interviewing practices? A representative sample (n=91) of police interviews conducted during the period of 1985–2002 from a large Norwegian police district was analysed. The results indicated that interviewer strategies have improved; there was a decrease in the use of suggestive, yes/no and option-posing questions and this decrease was accompanied by a comparable increase in the use of cued recall questions. The frequency of open-ended invitations was low and did not change much over time. Factors that might have led to the observed changes are briefly discussed.     

What judges know about eyewitness testimony: A comparison of Norwegian and US judges

Abstract

We surveyed 157 Norwegian judges about their knowledge and beliefs about eyewitness testimony, and compared their answers to a prior survey of 160 US judges. Although the Norwegian judges were somewhat more knowledgeable than the US judges, both groups had limited knowledge of eyewitness testimony. The Norwegian judges, like the US judges, frequently differed from eyewitness experts in their responses to such important issues as whether eyewitness confidence is related to identification accuracy at trial and what is the best method for conducting identification procedures. As was true for the US judges, more knowledgeable Norwegian judges had many of the beliefs that may be necessary for reducing and mitigating the effects of eyewitness error. The results suggest that increasing judges’ knowledge of eyewitness testimony may be an important component of the solution to eyewitness error.     

Crime and Psychiatry in Problematic Coexistence: Four Domestic Homicides and the Nineteenth-Century Courts

Four domestic murder cases of a fairly similar character are described: a man killing his child or children, and in one case also his wife. They occurred in three neighbouring rural parishes in northern Sweden in the mid-nineteenth century within a period of about 20 years.

The four offenders showed all the signs of being seriously mentally deranged. Three of them made either unsuccessful attempts to commit suicide or expressed the intention of committing suicide. The motives of the offenders contain elements of a father's wanting to spare his children from social, economic, or religious suffering.

The key question is why the outcomes of the similar cases differed. Legal, religious, medical, and some popular, normative standards are considered. As well as elements used in the medico-legal examinations, other considerations obviously contributed to the different outcomes, such as the various backgrounds of the offenders and whether they showed regret or not in court.

The different outcomes illustrate a recurring problem, namely how to reconcile ideas emanating from various professional traditions and standards. This is of current interest as evidenced by the number of recent cases where a legal way of thinking is sometimes contrary to prevalent medical ones.