Getting awaywith murder IVIntimate Partner Violence Deaths2001-2002The New MexicoIntimate Partner ViolenceDeath Review TeamGetting Away with MurderVolume IVIntimate Partner Violence Deaths 2001–2002 The New Mexico Intimate Partner Violence Death Review TeamCompiled by:Michael BauerCameron Crandall, MDDavid Sklar, MDCenter for Injury Prevention, Research, and EducationDepartment of Emergency Medicine School of MedicineUniversity of New MexicoNew Mexico Intimate Partner Death Review Team Executive Summary3The New Mexico Intimate Partner Violence Death Review Team was established in 1997 to review female homi-cide deaths resulting from domestic violence. The findings of the first report, Getting Away with Murder, werepublished in 1998, and covered deaths occurring from 1993 to 1996. The second report, Getting Away withMurder II, was published in 1999 and included sexual assault homicide deaths as part of the review process. Thethird volume surveyed the years 1999 and 2000 and unlike the previous years included male intimate partner vio-lence (IPV) homicides. This latest report, Getting Away with Murder IV, continues this effort for the period from2001 and 2002. The New Mexico Intimate Partner Violence Death Review Team is modeled on Child Fatality review teamswhich use a multi-agency approach to examine potentially preventable deaths. We use the term “intimate part-ner violence” rather than “domestic violence” (DV) because it more accurately defines the nature of the rela-tionship between the victim and the perpetrator. Intimate partners include individuals who are or were dating,married, or formerly married, and include same-sex and opposite-sex partnerships. The term IPV excludes vio-lence between non-intimate family members such as parents, siblings and grandparents. We used this model toinvestigate homicide deaths where the perpetrator was a former or current intimate partner. The goals of the teamincluded identifying factors that were associated with increased risk of lethality, finding weaknesses in the sys-tems that are designed to protect victims, and developing strategies and recommendations to prevent futureinjury and death. In this latest report, we expanded the scope of the review by taking a broader look at others who may have diedwithin the context of intimate partner violence. For example, we scrutinized autopsy records for instances wherelaw enforcement or emergency medical services personnel were killed responding to IPV-related calls for serv-ice. Events where people other than children were killed during an IPV-related homicide were also documented.We also identified cases where an ex-husband killed a new partner of his ex-wife and where the opposite wasalso true. Finally, we considered cases where the manner of death was undetermined, but there was an appre-ciable relationship to IPV. Due to resource constraints, we did not seek to identify the link between female sui-cide and a history of abuse, but it is the contention of many researchers that such a link exists and we hope tosee this idea developed in future work. Such observations highlight the need for an increased understanding ofall the deaths attributable in one form or another to IPV. For the years 2001 and 2002, 315 homicides were identified from New Mexico Office of the Medical Investigatorautopsy records; 31 cases (23 females and 8 males) involved IPV. In one of these deaths, the indicted suspect diedof natural causes before adjudication therefore the case remains technically open and has not been included in thisreport. The numbers do not include the five children killed or the additional ten fatalities discussed on page thir-teen of this report which also occurred within the context of IPV. The team reviewed a total of 30 cases: 77% ofthe victims were female and 23% male. Fifty percent of the victims were Hispanic, 36% were Anglo, 7% wereAfrican American, and 7% were American Indian. The average age of the victim was 34 years and the averageage of the perpetrator was 37 years. Half of the victims died in their homes (50%) and over half the murders werecommitted with a firearm (60%). Nearly half (43%) of the cases were homicides immediately followed by suicideof the perpetrator. Of the cases that were closed with a judgment and sentence (64% pleaded to a lesser chargeand 36% convicted), there was an average actual term of 16.2 years. The longest sentence was three consecutivelife terms and the shortest in duration was one year. One-third of the cases involved children who were killed,directly witnessed the death, or were present in the home when the homicide occurred. Executive SummaryNew Mexico Intimate Partner Death Review Team Executive SummaryExecutive Summary4Another area of interest to the team concerned the prevalence of alcohol and drug use in the commission of thesecrimes. An examination of toxicology data for victims and perpetrators in our homicide/suicide group from 1999to 2002 revealed that 68% of the cases involved alcohol or drug use among the perpetrator and/or victim. Whilethe connection between substance abuse and IPV is well established, the team believes that researchers and cli-nicians in both fields can develop a higher level of system integration towards improved treatment protocols. Nine years of data (1994–2002) indicated that 38% of female homicides in New Mexico were IPV-related. Thepercentage was higher in some years than others. For instance, from 1999 to 2000, the percentage was the high-est approaching 48%, whereas from 1994 to 1996, the percentage was the lowest at around 32%. The range,therefore, is between 32% to 48%.A question that is frequently raised for homicide review teams is whether we can predict which cases will resultin a fatality. The short answer is no. One of the reasons that might underscore the difficulty in reducing fatalitieshas to do with the pervasiveness of IPV. It is as if this pattern of lethal and non-lethal violence is embedded intothe fabric of our society. At the heart of any fatality review process is an attempt to articulate the fundamentalchanges that need to be made in civil society to support vulnerable families and individuals.The purpose of the project was not only to assess the prevalence of lethal intimate partner violence, but also toinfluence the formation of improved social policies. For example, by improving the systems that assist victims,perpetrators, and children, and