Types of stalkers

Psychologists often group individuals who stalk into two categories: psychotic and nonpsychotic.[6] Some stalkers may have pre-existing psychotic disorders such as delusional disorderschizoaffective disorder, or schizophrenia. However, most stalkers are nonpsychotic and may exhibit disorders or neuroses such as major depressionadjustment disorder, or substance dependence, as well as a variety of personality disorders (such as antisocialborderline, or narcissistic). The nonpsychotic stalkers’ pursuit of victims is primarily angry, vindictive, focused, often including projection of blameobsessiondependencyminimizationdenial, and jealousy. Conversely, only 10% of stalkers had an erotomanic delusional disorder.[21]

In “A Study of Stalkers” Mullen et al. (2000)[22] identified five types of stalkers:

  • Rejected stalkers follow their victims in order to reverse, correct, or avenge a rejection (e.g. divorce, separation, termination).
  • Resentful stalkers make a vendetta because of a sense of grievance against the victims – motivated mainly by the desire to frighten and distress the victim.
  • Intimacy seekers seek to establish an intimate, loving relationship with their victim. Such stalkers often believe that the victim is a long-sought-after soul mate, and they were ‘meant’ to be together.
  • Incompetent suitors, despite poor social or courting skills, have a fixation, or in some cases, a sense of entitlement to an intimate relationship with those who have attracted their amorous interest. Their victims are most often already in a dating relationship with someone else.
  • Predatory stalkers spy on the victim in order to prepare and plan an attack – often sexual – on the victim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking

Stalking

People characterized as stalkers may be accused of having a mistaken belief that another person loves them (erotomania), or that they need rescuing.[11] Stalking can consist of an accumulation of a series of actions which, by themselves, can be legal, such as calling on the phone, sending gifts, or sending emails.[13]

Stalkers may use overt and covert intimidation, threats and violence to frighten their victims. They may engage in vandalism and property damage or make physical attacks that are meant to frighten. Less common are sexual assaults.[11]

Intimate partner stalkers are the most dangerous type.[1] In the UK, for example, most stalkers are former partners and evidence indicates that mental illness-facilitated stalking propagated in the media accounts for only a minority of cases of alleged stalking.[14] A UK Home Office research study on the use of the Protection from Harassment Act stated: “The study found that the Protection from Harassment Act is being used to deal with a variety of behaviour such as domestic and inter-neighbour disputes. It is rarely used for stalking as portrayed by the media since only a small minority of cases in the survey involved such behaviour.”[14]

Psychological effects on victims

Disruptions in daily life necessary to escape the stalker, including changes in employment, residence and phone numbers, take a toll on the victim’s well-being and may lead to a sense of isolation.[15]

According to Lamber Royakkers:[13]

Stalking is a form of mental assault, in which the perpetrator repeatedly, unwantedly, and disruptively breaks into the life-world of the victim, with whom they have no relationship (or no longer have). Moreover, the separated acts that make up the intrusion cannot by themselves cause the mental abuse, but do taken together (cumulative effect).

Harassment

Harassment covers a wide range of behaviors of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behavior that demeans, humiliates or embarrasses a person, and it is characteristically identified by its unlikelihood in terms of social and moral reasonableness. In the legal sense, these are behaviors that appear to be disturbing, upsetting or threatening. They evolve from discriminatory grounds, and have an effect of nullifying a person’s rights or impairing a person from benefiting from their rights. When these behaviors become repetitive, it is defined as bullying. The continuity or repetitiveness and the aspect of distressing, alarming or threatening may distinguish it from insult.

Online

Distribution of cyberbullying venues[16] used by young people in the US as of 2008, according to the Centers for Disease Control[17]Main article: Online harassment

Harassment directs multiple repeating obscenities and derogatory comments at specific individuals focusing, for example, on the targets’ race, religion, gender, nationality, disability, or sexual orientation. This often occurs in chat rooms, through newsgroups, and by sending hate e-mail to interested parties. This may also include stealing photos of the victim and their families, doctoring these photos in offensive ways, and then posting them on social media with the aim of causing emotional distress (see cyberbullyingcyberstalkinghate crimeonline predatorOnline Gender-Based Violence, and stalking).

Psychological

This is humiliating, intimidating or abusive behavior which is often difficult to detect, leaving no evidence other than victim reports or complaints. This characteristically lowers a person’s self-esteem or causes one to have overwhelming torment.[18] This can take the form of verbal comments, engineered episodes of intimidation, aggressive actions or repeated gestures. Falling into this category is workplace harassment by individuals or groups mobbing.

Community-based psychological harassment, meanwhile, is stalking by a group[19] against an individual using repeated distractions that the individual is sensitized to. Media reports of large numbers of coordinated groups stalking individual stalking victims, including a press interview given by an active duty police lieutenant, have described this community-based harassment as gang stalking.[20][21]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harassment

Psychological impact of being wrongfully accused of criminal offences

Being wrongfully accused of criminal offences can lead to serious negative consequences to those wrongfully accused and their families. However, there is little research on the psychological and psychosocial impacts of wrongful accusations. We conducted a systematic literature review to collate the existing literature, searching four electronic literature databases and reference lists of relevant articles. Data were extracted from 20 relevant papers, and thematic analysis was conducted on the data. Eight main themes were identified: loss of identity; stigma; psychological and physical health; relationships with others; attitudes towards the justice system; impact on finances and employment; traumatic experiences in custody; and adjustment difficulties. The psychological consequences of wrongful accusations appear to affect the lives of those accused seriously, even after exoneration or overturning of convictions. Strategies for improving public perception of wrongful convictions should be explored, and specific mental-health systems should be established to support those who are wrongfully accused.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32807017/

Here’s the truth about false accusations of sexual violence

Why didn’t these women speak up sooner? This was asked time and time again during the recent public furore around sexual harassment, violence and abuse. Underlying the question is a persistent uncertainty about the credibility of victims – a concern with identifying what is true and what is false.

As women speak out, some have been met with explicit counter accusations that their descriptions are untrue. Others have been served with a defamation case which has resulted in the Solidarity Not Silence campaign to raise funds to fight the ensuing legal battle.

What’s clear is that the spectre of false allegation continues to dog the reporting of sexual violence. There remains a public impression that false allegations are common and that innocent people suffer as the result of being wrongfully accused.

http://www.open.ac.uk/research/news/false-accusations-sexual-violence

Wasting Police Time

When wasting police time is being considered as the appropriate charge, a prosecution is more likely to be required where:

  • public / police resources being diverted for the purposes of investigation for a sufficient period;
  • where a substantial cost is incurred – for example, where expensive scientific examination has to be undertaken;
  • considerable distress is caused to the accused by the reporting;
  • where the false report alleges that a particularly grave offence has been committed;
  • there is significant premeditation in the making of the report; or
  • the complainant persists with the allegation, even when challenged.

It follows that, in order to make such an assessment, it will be important that prosecutors are presented with all background evidence available about the suspect, such as any mental health issues or learning difficulties, their age and intellectual maturity, their mental capacity in understanding the nature of the allegation made and whether they have any other vulnerabilities, such as being a victim of sexual or domestic abuse, or if they misuse any substances. The vulnerability of the complainant needs to be properly understood and taken into consideration. Prosecutors should ask whether there any indication that further support / intervention is required over and above a criminal justice outcome?

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/false-allegations-rape-andor-domestic-abuse-see-guidance-charging-perverting-course

Perverting the Course of Justice

Perverting the Course of Justice

Perverting the course of justice is a serious offence. It can only be tried on indictment and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The offence is committed where a person:

  • does an act (a positive act or series of acts is required; mere inaction is insufficient);
  • which has a tendency to pervert; and
  • which is intended to pervert the course of public justice.

The course of justice includes the police investigation of a possible crime (it is not necessary for legal proceedings to have begun). A false allegation which risks the arrest or wrongful conviction of an innocent person is enough. The word pervert can mean “alter” but the behaviour does not have to go that far – any act that interferes with an investigation or causes it to head in the wrong direction may tend to pervert the course of justice. All the prosecution needs to prove is that there is a possibility that what the complainant has done “without more” might lead to a wrongful consequence, such as the arrest of an innocent person (Murray (1982) 75 Cr. App. R. 58).

Intention is not the same as motive. However, the motive of the complainant is likely to be important if the public interest stage is reached. The prosecution must prove an intention either to pervert the course of justice or to do something which, if achieved, would pervert the course of justice. All that is necessary is proof of knowledge of all the circumstances, and the intentional doing of an act which has a tendency, when objectively viewed, to pervert the course of justice.

Where the prosecution case is that a false allegation has been made, all that is required is that the person making the false allegation intended that it should be taken seriously by the police. It is not necessary to prove that she / he intended that anyone should actually be arrested (Cotter [2002] 2 Cr. App. R. 762).

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/false-allegations-rape-andor-domestic-abuse-see-guidance-charging-perverting-course

What data can the police get from my phone?

The police can often obtain information about nearly every area of a person’s life simply by looking through their phone. Data they can get includes:

  • Social media activity
  • Photos
  • Messages to and from other people
  • Contact details for your friends, family, and acquaintances
  • Emails
  • Browsing history
  • Location data
  • Calendar
  • Third party apps, including WhatsApp
  • Shopping habits
  • Banking
  • “hidden” data such as deleted messages and photos

WHAT IS THE PENALTY FOR WASTING POLICE TIME?

Wasting police time is a criminal offence as outlined under section 5(2) of the Criminal Law Act 1967. Knowingly making false reports to the police is an offence, including verbal or written statements that:

  • Someone has committed an offence
  • That people or property are at real risk
  • That the reporter has information that is relevant to a police enquiry.

For proceedings to be brought for an offence of wasting police time, the Director of Public Prosecutions must initiate proceedings or give consent for initiation. This type of offence is a summary only, and this means that proceedings must begin within the summary time limit of six months.

The time limit for prosecution begins from the date that the complaint was made, rather than the date that falseness of the statement was suspected or determined. Continue reading “WHAT IS THE PENALTY FOR WASTING POLICE TIME?”

Wasting police time

An offence committed by someone who causes wasteful employment of the police by making a false report about an offence or by implying that a person or property is in danger or that he has information relevant to a police inquiry.

SAMSUNG CSC
SAMSUNG CSC

 

Continue reading “Wasting police time”