Legal Medicine and Toxicology, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic, Vascular Sciences and Public Health, University of Padova, Via G. Falloppio n.50, Padova, 35121, Italy.
Legal Medicine, ULSS 3 Serenissima, Venice Piazzale S. Lorenzo Giustiniani, 11/d, Mestre (Venice), 30174, Italy.
J Forensic Sci. 2020 Jul;65(4):1184-1190. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.14285. Epub 2020 Jan 31.
The interpretation of sharp force fatality dynamics may be difficult in some cases, but a contribution to analysis of the phenomenon may be provided by case studies. Therefore, the purpose of our study is focused on identifying, in observed sharp force fatalities, reliable parameters that can differentiate a homicidal and suicidal manner of death, with particular reference to criminological parameters. Data derived from sharp force fatality cases in Padua and Venice from 1997 to 2019, anonymized and collected in Excel, included personal, circumstantial, clinical, and psychopathological-criminological data, as well as crime scene investigation, necroscopic, and toxicological data. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Possible predictors of homicide were analyzed by logistic regression. Six parameters (bloodstains distant from the body, clothing lacerations, hesitation/defense wounds, number of injuries, and potential motives) were significantly different in the two groups (p < 0.05). An independent statistical association between potential motives explaining the crime (p < 0.001; OR 27.533) and homicide on multiple logistic regression analysis was highlighted. The absence of clothing lacerations was inversely related to homicide (p = 0.002, OR 0.092). To the best of our knowledge, this is one of very few Italian studies concerning the differential diagnosis between homicidal and suicidal sharp force fatalities. The dynamics of the event is established in most cases by the integrated evaluation of data from crime scene investigation and the autopsy. Nevertheless, in an atypical scenario, a psychopathological-criminological analysis may provide essential elements, and particular attention should be given to the identification of potential explanatory motives.
在某些情况下，可能难以解释锐利工具致死的动态，但案例研究可能为分析这一现象提供帮助。因此，我们的研究目的是确定在观察到的锐利工具致死案例中，能够区分凶杀和自杀死亡方式的可靠参数，特别参考犯罪学参数。本研究的数据来自 1997 年至 2019 年在帕多瓦和威尼斯发生的锐利工具致死案件，数据以匿名形式收集在 Excel 表格中，包括个人、环境、临床和精神病理-犯罪学数据，以及犯罪现场调查、尸体剖检和毒理学数据。使用卡方检验和 Wilcoxon 秩和检验进行统计分析。通过逻辑回归分析可能的凶杀预测因素。两组之间有六个参数（远离尸体的血迹、衣物撕裂、犹豫/防御性伤口、损伤数量和潜在动机）存在显著差异（p<0.05）。在多因素逻辑回归分析中，潜在动机解释犯罪（p<0.001；OR 27.533）与凶杀之间存在独立的统计学关联。衣物撕裂的缺失与凶杀呈负相关（p=0.002，OR 0.092）。据我们所知，这是为数不多的意大利关于凶杀和自杀锐利工具致死的鉴别诊断的研究之一。在大多数情况下，通过犯罪现场调查和尸检数据的综合评估可以确定事件的动态。然而，在不典型的情况下，精神病理-犯罪学分析可能提供重要的元素，应特别注意确定潜在的解释性动机。
