Intrafamilial Homicide: A Descriptive Study of Fratricide in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Fratricide comprises approximately 2% of all intra-familial homicides. Analyses of national data on fratricide show that adult males are considerably more likely to be offenders and victims or fratricide. A previous study suggested there were two main categories of fratricide: related to alcohol intoxication or associated with mental disorder. Objectives Present and discuss the results of an original study comprising 28 cases of fratricide. Aims To provide up-to-date scientific knowledge on fratricide. Method This is a retrospective study of 28 cases of fratricides, extracted from a sample of over 1000 consecutive cases of coroners’ files of victims of domestic homicide occurring between 1990–2015. Results Two victims out of three were males, most of adult age. There were only 2 female offenders in the whole sample. A majority of victims were Caucasians while 21% were aboriginals. Most victims were stabbed to death. The murders usually occurred at the residence of the victim. In total, 39% of offenders suffered from a major mental illness; 21% were acutely intoxicated at the time. In victims, 29% were under the influence of alcohol and 18% of offenders were free from mental problems. Conclusion Our data indicates that fratricides are most often impulsive and lack preparation. The most common method was the opportunistic use of a knife, suggestive of impulsive killing, and this is consistent with the rest of the information including the high rate of alcohol use and intoxication at the time. The study confirmed two main categories of fratricide: impulsive killing in the context of alcohol and dispute and killing associated with psychosis. Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".