Comparing Solved and Unsolved No-Body Homicides in Australia: An Exploratory Analysis

• Author: Claire Ferguson,Kamarah Pooley
• DOI: 10.1177/1088767919852381
• Date: 01 November 2019
• Published date: 01 November 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1088767919852381

Homicide Studies

2019, Vol. 23(4) 381 –403

© 2019 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1088767919852381

journals.sagepub.com/home/hsx

Article

Comparing Solved and

Unsolved No-Body

Homicides in Australia:

An Exploratory Analysis

Claire Ferguson1 and Kamarah Pooley1

Abstract

Factors that are both within and outside of police discretion can pose challenges to

solving homicides generally. There has been little study of no-body homicides, nor

why some remain unresolved. This analysis compares solved and unsolved no-body

homicides in Australia using Pearson’s chi-square tests of independence. Coroners’

findings, case law, and media reports from 1983 to 2017 were examined. Cases

(N = 55; 42.4% solved) differed based on the victim’s age, who reported them

missing, reward money, Coronial inquests, who determined homicide, availability of

evidence and confessions, suspects lying, establishing crime scenes, and motivations.

Keywords

homicide, solvability, death investigation, missing persons, Coroner’s inquest

Introduction

In most jurisdictions around the world, police solve homicides at a greater rate than

other types of violent crime (Holmes & Fitzgerald, 2017; Queensland Police Service,

2017; U.S. Department of Justice, 2016). Despite the lack of a complaining witness,

homicide solve rates are relatively high in many jurisdictions due to the evidence com-

monly created and the effort, resources, and support expended by police administra-

tors, detectives, and the community to resolve them (Klinger, 1997; Regoeczi,

Kennedy, & Silverman, 2000). Barring major challenges then, literature indicates that

1Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

Corresponding Author:

Claire Ferguson, School of Justice, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, Brisbane,

Queensland 4000, Australia.

Email: claire.ferguson@qut.edu.au

852381HSXXXX10.1177/1088767919852381Homicide StudiesFerguson and Pooley

research-article2019

382 Homicide Studies 23(4)

more than 50% of murders are eventually solved in many first-world jurisdictions

(Holmes & Fitzgerald, 2017; Queensland Police Service, 2017; U.S. Department of

Justice, 2016). In Australia, clearance rates have consistently been above 85% since

1990 (Bryant & Bricknell, 2017; Mouzos & Muller, 2001).

Two competing theories have been proposed to explain why some homicides are

not solved. The discretionary perspective holds that the key determinants of whether a

homicide will be cleared are the victim’s characteristics and the area where the crime

occurred (Carter & Carter, 2016; Riedel & Rinehart, 1996; Riedel, 2008). This theory

proposes that detectives use their discretion to preference those cases involving vic-

tims whose class, race, sex, and age make them more worthy of investigative dili-

gence, and those cases which occur in lower crime areas (Puckett & Lundman, 2003;

Riedel & Rinehart, 1996; Riedel, 2008). Under this theory, homicides involving home-

less elderly men in high crime areas are less likely to be solved than those involving

high-profile, wealthy young women in low crime areas, due to detectives working

harder on the latter type of cases. The nondiscretionary perspective argues that police

work diligently on all homicide cases regardless of who the victim is or where the

crime occurred (Klinger, 1997; Puckett & Lundman, 2003; Riedel, 2008). Proponents

argue that homicides remain unsolved due to a lack of community cooperation, char-

acteristics of the crime, or little availability of evidence and witnesses, rather than

discretionary factors attributable to police. For example, under a nondiscretionary

theory, it would be expected that homicides related to other serious offenses like rob-

bery, sexual assault, or illicit drugs, where the parties are unknown to each other,

would be more difficult to solve. Similarly, those cases involving few witnesses or a

lack of physical evidence due to the specific nature of the fatal assault or weapon used

would be more likely to remain unsolved.

Although there is some evidence to support both discretionary and nondiscretionary

theories, many studies have failed to find support for discretionary factors impacting on

solve rates (Marche, 1994; Puckett & Lundman, 2003; Regoeczi et al., 2000; Riedel &

Rinehart, 1996; Wellford & Cronin, 1999). Rather, there appears to be more support for

nondiscretionary factors playing a role in general clearance rates, at least in aggregate

form (Carter & Carter, 2016). Indeed, when homicides are not solved, the factors con-

sistently present commonly include a lack of physical evidence, a lack of witnesses,

and/or little cooperation from the community, all of which align more closely with

nondiscretionary perspectives of solvability (Marche, 1994; Puckett & Lundman, 2003;

Regoeczi et al., 2000; Riedel & Rinehart, 1996; Wellford & Cronin, 1999).

Regardless of whether evidence is not available because of the nature of the offense,

or because police did not collect, investigate, or follow up on it; it is known that a lack

of evidence effectively impedes a homicide investigation (Marche, 1994). However,

little work has been done to study how the absence of specific kinds of evidence

affects an investigation. It is intuitive that a homicide investigation is greatly hindered

without the main piece of physical evidence of murder—the victim’s body—resulting

in cases which are difficult or impossible to solve (DiBiase, 2014). Other than anec-

dotal evidence though, the literature examining no-body homicides is scarce.