A few weeks ago, in the aftermath of the July 1 stabbing death of Jessica Nichols in Waldoboro, the Bangor Daily News reported on this year’s increase in the number of Maine homicides relative to previous years. At the time, there had been 20 homicides. On July 26, two men were found shot to death in West Paris. Last weekend, a Palmyra man was slain on North Haven – bringing the yearly total to 23 so far.

This year’s Maine killings illustrate a number of patterns common to American homicides. The July 12-13 BDN article focuses on the fact that 14 of the year’s slayings have been connected to domestic violence and not stranger-on-stranger killings. While it is true that a 70 percent domestic violence connection for homicides is high, it is not true that in a “normal” year stranger-on-stranger killings account for most U.S. homicides. Most homicide victims know the perpetrators.

Department of Justice data compiled by Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox show that for all homicides between 1976 and 2005, stranger-on-stranger homicides account for only 14 percent. “Intimate” homicides, defined as spousal killings or a killing between partners in an intimate couple, accounted for 11 percent over the same period. The single largest group – year in, year out – consists of “friend or acquaintance” killings at 32 percent.

Although the 2008 Maine numbers don’t precisely measure up, several of the killings reflect this latter subpattern. Thus, Raymond Clark has been arrested for allegedly strangling his neighbor Audrey Lou Benn in Augusta in February. Stephen James, a homeless painter, was arrested for allegedly killing Clyde Worster, another homeless man and likely acquaintance, in a homeless campsite locally called “The Pines” near Interstate 95 in Bangor.

In short, homicides are most commonly committed by people who know their victim, whether intimately or casually, and not by strangers, as many people fear and believe.

How do we explain the prevalence of homicides between persons known to one another? One criminologist, Jack Katz of UCLA, points out that most murders are not random behavior but require a good deal of intentionality, if not actual planning. As a consequence, Katz has suggested that the “project” of “doing homicide” requires a script. In particular, he suggests that – with the exception of purely instrumental homicides such as mob hits – the perpetrator needs to build and sustain a compelling moral scenario that can overcome the strong normative prohibition against killing.

Katz theorizes that this is done is through “folk tales” that enshrine “righteous indignation” – leading the perpetrator to define violence as justifiable under the circumstances. Under his theory, the potential perpetrator must define the victim as having crossed a moral boundary by his own actions. If the perpetrator can come to believe a person “who would do such a thing” doesn’t have the right to live, then the perpetrator can psychologically justify murder. Killing not only becomes easier, it also becomes morally necessary because of the victim’s

perceived transgression.

Although Katz’s theory of “righteous indignation” is general in nature, it could be applied to circumstances that arise from romantic relationships. Several of this year’s homicides in Maine seem to have arisen from such a scenario, with the perpetrators apparently enraged by the ending of relationships, beginnings of new ones and even comments made about new or former partners. The emotion invested in a relationship makes the perpetrator feel proprietary and protective, even though it is over. As a matter of elementary chivalry, it is a man’s duty to protect his honor or that of one who is now or was once loved. In this way, the killing has been defined as morally righteous by the perpetrator.

While Katz’s theorizing can be faulted, it helps explain not only homicides between persons who know each other but also the relative infrequency of stranger-on-stranger homicides. The fact is strangers – by definition – have so little contact with each other that it is difficult to develop and work through a compelling moral tale that will justify killing. This leaves only “instrumental” or “accidental” killings: the innocent bystander or the store clerk killed in the course of a robbery. Neither is as common as perceived grievances and wrongs acted out violently between friends and family.

The recent killings in West Paris and North Haven tell the same story. Duane Waterman is accused of killing Timothy Mayberry and Todd Smith, all identified as “friends” by the Maine State Police. Enoch Petrucelly is accused of killing his brother Michael on North Haven last weekend.

Unpleasant as the reality may be, the 2008 Maine homicides fit well-known patterns.

Robert C. Hauhart is an associate professor of criminal justice at Saint Martin’s University in Lacey, Wash. He lives in Steuben in the summer and has taught on campus and online for the University of Maine at Machias since 2002.