This article is flawed while the original paper might not, if it does exist. In this article, the author didn't mention the core methodology of how he managed t

This article is flawed while the original paper might not, if it does exist. In this article, the author didn't mention the core methodology of how he managed to find out the reason behind each violence, by interview, court record, or newspaper? How he interpreted the description of motivation from his sources? How he distinguished motivation and excuse (or self justification)? I think it's meaningless just to state his hypothesis.