RESEARCH
FLORIDA IPV HOMICIDE RESEARCH PROJECT
The Violet Thread identifies, verifies, sources, and codes publicly documented IPV homicide cases to make fragmented information more accessible and identify patterns that may inform education and prevention. The project begins in Florida and is designed to expand nationwide over time.
We distinguish between verified and documented information, information that is unknown or unavailable, and information that has not been documented in the sources reviewed. Missing information is never treated as evidence that something did not occur.
HOW A CASE BECOMES DATA
Documented evidence, carefully handled.
IDENTIFY
Locate publicly documented cases for review.
VERIFY
Confirm inclusion against defined methodology.
SOURCE
Gather credible public documentation and citations.
CODE
Apply defined variables only where evidence supports them.
REVIEW
Check classifications, citations, and public-facing context.
Public case information should be accompanied by source citations.
UNKNOWN ≠ NO
The absence of publicly available documentation does not mean a behavior, warning sign, or system interaction did not occur. Wherever appropriate, The Violet Thread distinguishes “No,” “Unknown,” and “Not publicly documented” rather than treating gaps in the record as conclusions.
WHAT WE STUDY
What may be documented.
Variables are coded only when supported by reviewed documentation and defined methodology.
CASE — INCIDENT DATE • AGE • CITY • COUNTY • STATE
RELATIONSHIP — RELATIONSHIP TO PERPETRATOR • SEPARATION CONTEXT
DOCUMENTED CONTEXT — STALKING • THREATS • COERCIVE CONTROL
DOCUMENTED CONTEXT — STRANGULATION HISTORY • PRIOR IPV
CASE — CASE CLASSIFICATION • METHOD / WEAPON
DOCUMENTED CONTEXT — PROTECTIVE ORDER • PRIOR SYSTEM CONTACT
DOCUMENTED CONTEXT — CHILDREN PRESENT OR AFFECTED
RECORD — INCIDENT SUMMARY • SOURCES • LAST REVIEWED • RESEARCH STATUS
RESEARCH CONTEXT
Separation as context.
Separation and estrangement are well-established contexts in intimate-partner homicide research, particularly in studies examining women killed by male intimate partners. But separation does not cause homicide, and it should not be treated as a prediction of what will happen in an individual relationship.
Research definitions also vary. “Separation” may refer to leaving or asking a partner to leave, physical separation, relationship termination, estrangement, former-partner status, or divorce proceedings. Attempted, informal, temporary, or repeated separations may be more difficult to identify in public records.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 02
Coercive Control
Coercive control is a pattern of abusive behaviors used to dominate an intimate partner and restrict their autonomy, freedom, or independence. It is defined by the cumulative pattern and impact of behaviors over time—not by any single act.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 03
STRANGULATION
Strangulation deserves its own recognition.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 04
STALKING
WHAT STALKING MEANS
Stalking involves a pattern of repeated, unwanted attention, contact, harassment, or threatening behavior that causes fear or concern for a person’s safety or the safety of someone close to them. Individual acts may include following or watching someone, repeatedly contacting them, showing up where they live or work, monitoring their activity or location, leaving unwanted items or gifts, or other behaviors that become threatening within the larger pattern and context.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 05
FIREARMS & WEAPONS
FIREARMS IN INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE
Firearms can be involved in intimate partner violence in lethal and nonlethal ways. A firearm may be used to injure or kill, but it may also be used to threaten, intimidate, coerce, or create fear without being discharged. Research on IPV and firearms therefore extends beyond firearm homicide alone.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 06
PROTECTIVE ORDERS & PRIOR SYSTEM CONTACT
Before a homicide, a victim may have already crossed paths with systems designed to respond to violence. Police reports, protective orders, court proceedings, healthcare encounters, advocacy services, and other documented help-seeking can provide important context—but their absence from a record does not establish that help was never sought.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 07
THREATS TO KILL
Threats to kill are not simply inflammatory language within an abusive relationship. Research on intimate partner homicide has identified threats to kill as an important lethality risk factor—particularly when they occur alongside other indicators such as weapon threats, firearm access, escalating violence, coercive control, stalking, or separation.
Risk factors describe increased danger across populations; they do not predict with certainty what will happen in an individual relationship.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 08
PRIOR INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE
Intimate partner homicide may be preceded by a documented history of abuse—but that history rarely fits neatly into a single category.
Prior violence can include physical or sexual assault, threats, stalking, coercive control, strangulation, weapon-related behavior, and changes in the frequency or severity of violence. Research on intimate partner femicide consistently examines these behaviors as overlapping parts of a broader pattern rather than isolated events.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 09
ESCALATING VIOLENCE
Escalation does not mean that intimate partner violence follows a predictable path from “less serious” to “more serious.” Violence may change gradually, suddenly, intermittently, or across several dimensions at once.
What matters in lethality research is change in the pattern. Researchers and risk-assessment instruments examine whether violence has become more frequent or severe, whether new forms of violence have appeared, and how those changes intersect with other risk factors.
ESCALATION DESCRIBES CHANGE — NOT A UNIVERSAL SEQUENCE.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
RESEARCH CONTEXT 10
THREATS INVOLVING CHILDREN, FAMILY, PETS, OTHERS & SELF-HARM
Threats within intimate partner violence do not always target the intimate partner directly. Children, relatives, friends, pets, new partners, and other people or relationships important to a victim may become targets of threats, intimidation, or harm.
In some cases, the threatened target and the person an abusive partner is attempting to frighten or control are not the same person. Research on coercive control therefore examines not only who is threatened, but how threats toward others may function within the broader pattern of abuse.
THE TARGET OF A THREAT AND THE PERSON BEING CONTROLLED ARE NOT ALWAYS THE SAME.
EXPLORE RESEARCH +
METHODOLOGY & TRANSPARENCY
Defined methods, visible limits.
Classification decisions are based on documented evidence and defined methodology rather than speculation. This area will publish the project’s inclusion and exclusion criteria, definitions, source hierarchy, verification standards, corrections process, limitations, version and update information, and ethical standards.
INCLUSION / EXCLUSION CRITERIA
SOURCE HIERARCHY & VERIFICATION
DATA DEFINITIONS
LIMITATIONS & ETHICAL STANDARDS
VERSION / UPDATE INFORMATION
CORRECTIONS & REVIEW PROCESS
LIMITS OF THE RECORD
What the data cannot tell us.
Public records cannot reconstruct an entire relationship.
The absence of documented police contact does not establish that abuse was absent. News coverage varies between cases and communities. Records may be incomplete, unavailable, sealed, contradictory, or never created at all.
The archive can document patterns within the information available, but it cannot determine exactly what occurred behind closed doors, explain why an individual acted violently, or predict what would have happened under different circumstances.
The Violet Thread does not create a proprietary lethality or danger score. Documented risk factors are preserved as context and interpreted alongside established research—not used to predict an individual outcome.
EVIDENCE LANGUAGE
Association is not causation. Risk is not prediction.
The Violet Thread distinguishes documented facts, interpretation, and unknown information. A documented factor does not make an outcome inevitable, and the absence of public documentation does not establish that something did not occur.
DOCUMENTED — supported by reviewed sources.
UNKNOWN — available information does not establish an answer.
NOT PUBLICLY DOCUMENTED — reviewed public sources do not document the information.
NO — credible documentation specifically supports absence, when appropriate.
RESEARCH & SOURCES
Evidence informing the methodology
The Violet Thread’s methodology is informed by established intimate partner violence research, public-health definitions, and recognized frameworks for documenting violence and related risk contexts. Sources guide terminology, coding decisions, and interpretation—not predicting individual outcomes.
01 — INTIMATE PARTNER HOMICIDE
Risk Factors for Femicide in Abusive Relationships
Campbell JC, Webster D, Koziol-McLain J, et al. (2003). American Journal of Public Health, 93(7), 1089–1097
Foundational case-control research examining documented factors associated with intimate partner femicide. The study informs The Violet Thread’s treatment of factors including separation context, coercive control, threats, firearms, and prior violence.
02 — IPV DEFINITIONS
Intimate Partner Violence Surveillance: Uniform Definitions and Recommended Data Elements
Breiding MJ, Basile KC, Smith SG, Black MC, Mahendra RR. (2015). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Provides standardized definitions and recommended data elements for documenting intimate partner violence. This framework helps inform consistent terminology and coding within The Violet Thread.
03 — INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE
About Intimate Partner Violence
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Provides the public-health framework for understanding intimate partner violence, including physical violence, sexual violence, stalking, and psychological aggression by a current or former intimate partner.
04 — STALKING
About Stalking
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Provides definitions and examples of stalking behaviors, including unwanted contact, surveillance, threats, and technology-facilitated tactics. This framework helps inform how stalking-related information is documented within The Violet Thread.
FUTURE REVIEW PATHWAY
Corrections & Additional Information
A future review pathway will allow families, researchers, agencies, journalists, and members of the public to submit corrections or additional public sources for consideration. Submissions will not automatically alter the public database; information must be reviewed before publication.
SUBMISSION PATHWAY — COMING WHEN REVIEW PROTOCOLS ARE READY
FUTURE PUBLIC INTERFACE
Explore the Data
The searchable Florida IPV Homicide Database will appear here when verified data is ready for public release. It will support transparent exploration without presenting placeholder records, statistics, or conclusions as evidence.
YEAR
COUNTY
VICTIM DEMOGRAPHICS
RELATIONSHIP
METHOD / WEAPON
CODED RISK FACTORS
SEPARATION
STALKING
SYSTEM CONTACT
NO CASE RECORDS OR STATISTICS ARE DISPLAYED UNTIL VERIFIED DATA IS READY.
ACCURACY BEFORE SCALE.
PEOPLE BEFORE NUMBERS.
Every statistic had a name. Every name had a life.
If you or someone you know is in immediate danger, contact local emergency services. Quick Exit leaves the current page but does not erase browser history.
REMEMBER • RECOGNIZE • BREAK