Some jurisdictions e. California, the UK [excluding Scotland], Italy leave the conduct requirement at this point without further defining the nature of the acts that constitute stalking. However, others e. Michigan, most Australian jurisdictions, New Zealand specifically state what kinds of behaviour are considered to be stalking if they are engaged in repeatedly. Stalking laws are intentionally extremely broad so as not to limit their application.
In many jurisdictions, behaviours that that are only minimally intrusive are labelled stalking and prosecuted as such. If you are a professional working with stalkers, you are likely to occasionally see clients who have made only one or two phone calls, or loitered near a house on one or two locations. It is important to remember that these individuals can still meet legal criteria for stalking and receive criminal sanctions, even if their behaviour may not present a high risk to the victim or others.
As such, it is essential to be able to effectively communicate about what risks are present in stalking situations, and what characteristics make a stalker high, or low, risk. It is a general principle of criminal law that in order to be guilty of a crime, the perpetrator has to have either intended to commit the crime, or, if lacking intent, has been reckless to the possible consequences of their behaviour.
In some offences, only general intent is required e. Most anti-stalking laws require either that the offender intended to harass or cause harm to the victim, or that they were reckless to the fact that their behaviour could have caused harm i. Requiring that the offender actually intend to cause harm is clearly problematic in some cases of stalking.
Some perpetrators have no intent to create fear or apprehension and are just using inept or misguided methods to try to establish a relationship with the victim. These stalkers may cause considerable fear in their victims and so should be subject to anti-stalking laws. In these jurisdictions there is no need to prove that the perpetrator intended to cause fear.
Instead, if the behaviour was one that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear, it is only necessary that the perpetrator intended to commit the act that caused fear e. This makes stalking virtually unique in that it can be a victim-defined crime, vastly different to most other criminal offences.
Victim response requirements:. In most jurisdictions, the final requisite element of anti-stalking legislation is the reaction of the victim to the stalking behaviour. Because a stalking episode can be composed of relatively innocuous behaviours, legislators often required that the victim be aware of and perceive the behaviour as threatening or intimidating.
Stalking is a combination of a number of different kinds of actions, such as telephone calls. Individually, these behaviors may appear to be innocent.
Taken together, they indicate the presence of a severe threat to the victim. Women should document all contact or other incidents involving the stalker including the time, date, kind of contact and nature of any threat or injury , keep all objects or gifts received from him, and save all messages he may leave whether recorded or in writing. Verbal communications should be recorded; it is important to write down exactly what the stalker said, even if the words are embarrassing.
Women who experience stalking should also engage in safety planning. It may be useful for her to change telephone numbers and keys, to vary her routine routes to work and home, regularly scheduled activities , and to inform her employer, family and friends that she does not want the stalker to be given her contact information.
Anti-stalking legislation recognizes this behavior as wrong and contributes to an awareness that stalking is a form of domestic violence. Stalking provisions allow prosecutors to add additional charges and can, in some cases, prevent violence by criminalizing behavior that would otherwise not be actionable.
Prosecutors should therefore examine the end situation in terms of the impact on the victim to determine whether someone has been stalked or harassed. A detailed statement from the victim in addition to a Victim Impact Statement should be requested from the police in order to determine the right charge. The following case studies are examples of when it might be appropriate to prosecute a defendant for harassment or stalking.
Any charging decision will depend on the particular facts unique to the case and each should be considered on a case-by-case basis. The victim is in her 80's and suffers from a disability which causes her to walk with a limp. The defendant Rex and his family who live down the street from her, constantly mock her at her disability. When she was walking past the house, the defendant made fun of how slow she walks and started following her very closely up the street laughing at her.
The victim felt distressed A few days later someone banged on her door for 5 minutes very loudly and she could hear a male laughing and saw it was Rex standing outside her door. He has since followed her making fun of her age and mobility problems on two further occasions when she has walked past the house. She feels very intimidated by Rex's behaviour and is starting to feel trapped in her home.
She is scared that if she reports Rex to the police, his family will make more trouble for her. In this case a section 2 charge is appropriate as there is a course of conduct, the course of conduct shows a number of incidents which can be described as harassment, causing the victim alarm or distress. This is also a disability crime as there is hostility based on the victim's disability. It is an aggravating factor under Section of the Criminal Justice Act , allowing a heavier tariff to be used in sentencing than the crime might draw without the hate elements.
A woman walks past a man as she leaves work and recognises him as an old work colleague. He stops her and says hello and states that he is just visiting some old colleagues. Two days later the woman sees the same man standing outside her house for ten minutes, hiding behind the hedge but runs off when she approaches him. The woman's friend is visiting and says that she passed a strange man sitting in a car outside her house. The woman states that this might be someone she used to work with.
She explains that she bumped in to him at work a couple of weeks ago and since then has seen him 4 or 5 times standing outside her house in the evening and watching her. The woman has become nervous and anxious and begins resorting to locking up all the windows and doors and keeps on checking a number of times.
The friend suggests he may be living close by but the woman says she is sure he moved away from the area years ago. The woman says that the man has been watching her all the time and is making her feel anxious. In this case a section 2A charge is appropriate as there is a course of conduct, the course of conduct has a number of features of stalking, and although the victim is troubled by the conduct, this falls short of serious alarm or distress.
A young woman had had a brief relationship with a man some years her senior who she had met through a dating agency. When she terminated the liaison by text message, he refused to accept her decision. He repeatedly telephoned her, stating that they were destined to be together and insisting she should marry him.
He sent hundreds of e-mails at her work and personal email accounts. He kept turning up at her door and began following her to work. He contacted her family to announce their engagement. When she still refused to have anything to do with him, his tone shifted and he wrote to her, stating that, if he could not have her, no-one would.
As a result of his behaviour the victim moved out of her address, changed her mobile telephone number and moved to another job. In this case a section 4A charge is appropriate as there is a course of conduct which causes the victim "serious alarm or distress" and the defendant's behaviour has a substantial adverse effect on the day-to-day activities of the victim.
The executive of a bank began receiving e-mails from a woman who appeared to hold him responsible for the failure of her business, the matter relating to a refusal to give a loan two years previously. Her tone was hostile. Over a period of months, her e-mails became more threatening in tone, and she demanded not only financial recompense, but a public apology.
She started sending e-mails to his seniors and to clients of the bank, claiming negligence, then persecution and conspiracy. She set up a web-site, dedicated to her cause, containing inflammatory statements about the bank employee.
His home address was published on the web-site with an exhortation that others should use it to write and protest on her behalf.
The effect of the woman's behaviours caused serious distress to the extent that the victim went on stress leave and was prescribed medication.
When assessing the acceptability of a plea to harassment when stalking has been charged, prosecutors should always consider what pleas best reflect the totality of the offending and the overall impact on the victim. Rather than looking at particular incidents of stalking, prosecutors should note that it is the cumulative effect of the stalking behaviour on the victim which should be assessed.
If a plea to harassment is offered when the defendant has been charged with stalking, as a starting point, the victim's view must be considered. Prosecutors should bear in mind the fact that defendants will often seek to minimise the offence or give mitigation for their offence or seek to avoid the "stigma" of being labelled as a stalker. In general, we should proceed on the basis that if the behaviour is clearly indicative of stalking, then that is the appropriate charge and should not accept a plea to harassment simply out of expediency.
Since the correct application of a restraining order can be a significant part in managing the risks to a victim and in preventing further harassment, the investigating officer should provide information about possible conditions for an order as soon as possible.
Prosecutors should also ensure, as part of reviewing the case, that a victim's view on a restraining order is sought from the outset. Restraining orders should be drafted to meet the particular risks presented in each case and should not be a repetition of routine clauses. One issue to be addressed is whether or not it is safe to include the victim's address on the order.
Suggested conditions include:. In particular, it is essential that the order is checked for accuracy - both in terms of content and spelling. Where the drafting of the order is incorrect, we may not be able to deal with breaches appropriately.
The purpose of the order is to protect the victim or other named person from any future harassment or fear of violence, rather than to punish the defendant. The order can be granted for a specified or indeterminate period of time, therefore, leaving the onus on the defendant to satisfy the court that they no longer present a risk to the victim. When preparing an order, consideration should be given to specifying the period of time that it should remain in force.
The restraining order is imposed at the time of sentence. It is imperative that we are supplied with relevant information such as a Victim Personal Statement or MG6 form by the police in good time for the sentencing hearing.
It is important that the terms of orders are clear, but not so prescriptive as to allow alternative forms of harassment. Geographical limitations, such as staying metres away from the victim, should be suggested with care. Difficulties could arise in proving distances should there be a breach, and harassment may be possible, for example, from metres.
Restraining orders should also be considered where the defendant receives a custodial penalty, as it is possible to harass or cause fear of violence from prison through the use of telephones, letters or third parties. The prison can be informed of the existence of an order by the police. The order can and sometimes should exceed the custodial period. A defendant may seek to make repeated applications for variation of the restraining order so as to continue harassing the victim.
In such cases, we should remind the court of its powers to control abuse of its process. Victims should be informed of applications to vary, and asked to express their views and to attend if necessary. Further information about restraining orders and the prosecution of breach of the orders as well as variation can be found in Restraining Orders , elsewhere in the Legal Guidance.
Sections 3 6 and 5 5 make it an offence for the defendant to do anything which he is prohibited from doing under an injunction issued under section 3, or a restraining order issued under section 5. It should be noted that whereas the section 2 and 4 offences require a course of conduct, breaches of court orders require only a single act. The sole defence to a breach of a criminal or a civil order is that the defendant had a reasonable excuse. The standard of proof, which it is for the defendant to put forward, is the balance of probabilities.
The PHA was introduced in largely to tackle stalking, though the offence of harassment extends to any form of persistent conduct which causes another alarm or distress. Therefore the range of behaviour that is capable of constituting an offence under the Act is potentially very wide.
Examples might include threatening emails, telephone calls, threatening letters, verbal abuse, criminal damage, etc. In its paper 'Animal Welfare - Human Rights - Protecting People from Animal Rights Extremists' July , the Government announced that it wished to strengthen the law to tackle campaigns of harassment by animal rights extremists and create a new offence of protesting outside homes.
It also flagged its intention to consider new offences of causing economic damage to the suppliers of firms or research groups engaged in the legitimate and licensed use of animals. The Government sought to capture behaviour which causes alarm or distress to individuals to the extent that organisations, universities or companies are deterred from carrying out their lawful business.
Section 2 of the SOCPA added a new subsection 1 1A to the PHA making it an offence for a person or persons to pursue a course of conduct involving the harassment of two or more persons on separate occasions which the defendant knows or ought to know involves harassment, the purpose of which is to persuade any person not necessarily one of the persons being harassed not to do something that he is entitled to do or to do something he is not under any obligation to do.
Section 7 of the SOCPA amended the definition of course of conduct in section 7 3 of the PHA so that in relation to two or more persons a course of conduct means conduct on at least one occasion in relation to each person. Again this allows a wider application of the legislation in terms of activities carried out in a group context. This means that companies now have the option to take out injunctions against people harassing their employees in the name of the company and will not have to take action in the name of a particular employee.
However, a course of conduct must involve conduct on at least two occasions, and in relation to the harassment of two or more persons, it means conduct on at least one occasion in relation to each person. It is clearly a matter for the courts, on a case by case basis to determine whether two or more incidents amount to a course of conduct which consequently leads to persons being alarmed or distressed.
The offence contains four ingredients which need to be proved. A person will commit an offence under section 42A 1 if:. The purpose of this offence is to give the police the ability to deal with harassing or intimidatory behaviour by individuals towards a person in his home even after an incident has taken place.
This means that the police can deal with protestors after the event. This will be useful if, for example, there is evidence of a protest on CCTV but the police were not present, or the police were present and could identify the protestors but there was some difficulty in enforcing a direction at the scene of the protest. The offence in section 42A of the CJPA might be used where, for example, protestors had conducted a rooftop protest at a person's home. If the police were not in attendance, but the resident had CCTV evidence of particular individuals on the roof of his house, and he had been harassed, alarmed or distressed by the presence of the protestors, the police could arrest the suspects for the new offence.
The penalty for this offence is imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale or both. Section 42A 2 of the CJPA defines persons who can be subjected to harassment, alarm or distress by the presence of others at their home.
They are the resident; a person in the resident's dwelling, for example, a child or partner; and a person in another dwelling in the vicinity of the resident's dwelling, i. There is no legal definition of "vicinity" and ultimately it is for the courts to determine what is meant by it as a matter of fact. It amends the Family Law Act by inserting a new section 42A, which makes it a criminal offence to breach a non-molestation order.
The offence of breach of a non-molestation order was introduced following concern that the available civil procedure was ineffective in preventing and deterring domestic violence. Previously, if a person breached their non-molestation order, he or she could only be arrested for a civil contempt of court if a power of arrest was attached to the order.
The maximum penalty for contempt is two years' imprisonment. The offence now may be punished either as a criminal offence with a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment, or as a civil contempt of court as before.
Accordingly, section 1 effectively gives complainants a choice on the mechanism by which a breach of a non-molestation order is dealt with. The complainant can either call the police to have the breach dealt with within the criminal jurisdiction, or they can make an application to have the person committed to custody for contempt application in the civil jurisdiction.
The two jurisdictions are exclusive and prosecutors will not be involved in civil proceedings. Section of the SOCPA amended section 42 of the CJPA to provide the police with an additional power to direct a person to leave the vicinity and not return within such period as a constable may specify - which can be up to 3 months.
If person does return within the period specified in the direction, beginning with the date on which the direction is given, and does so for the purposes of representing to or persuading a person not to do something he is entitled to do or to do something he is not obliged to do, he commits an offence. The maximum period for which a person can be required not to return is 3 months. The constable issuing the direction has discretion in deciding how long a person should be required not to return.
An example of when this power is likely to be appropriate is where there is evidence that the person whom the constable is directing to leave is also a regular protestor at particular premises and that requiring them not to return for a specified period will prevent harassment, alarm or distress being caused to the resident.
An offence will only be committed where a person returns within that specified period for the purpose of representing to, or persuading the resident not to do something he is entitled to do or to do something he is not obliged to do. The mere presence of a person in the vicinity may not be sufficient to prove the offence.
Section of the Protection of Freedoms Act gives the police additional powers. Police officers will have a power of entry in relation to the new offence of stalking under section 2A of the Protection from Harassment Act The power of entry is exercisable by warrant and will allow the police to enter and search premises if there are reasonable grounds for believing that an offence under new section 2A has been or is being committed.
A constable may also seize and retain anything for which the search has been authorised. The new powers to the police will aid in investigation and evidential gathering for example in harassment cases that involve cyber stalking. It is sometimes difficult to link the stalking behaviour of the offender to the victim without seizing the equipment used to stalk the victims. A power to search for and seize computers or other electronic equipment that may have been used to commit the offence would potentially strengthen the prosecution case.
When giving advice on cases of stalking and harassment, prosecutors should ensure that they have regard to the CPS Policy and legal guidance on prosecuting cases involving domestic violence, the Code for Crown Prosecutors, and the ACPO Guidance entitled: 'ACPO Practice Advice on investigating cases and Stalking and Harassment ', is available at: www.
There is not a general requirement for the police to refer all cases of stalking and harassment for a charging decision. However, many of these cases will fall within the definition of domestic violence and therefore in certain circumstances require CPS authority to charge. The police are also encouraged to seek early consultation in cases which may be complex or involve challenging issues.
Given the often complex nature of cases involving stalking and harassment it is likely that many stalking cases will be referred through to the CPS for pre-charge advice. In cases of stalking where the harassing behaviour is prolonged and targeted and the victim is considered to be at high risk, it is essential that management of the case is carefully considered. Some more complex and difficult cases may require the personal allocation of the file to a senior prosecutor who is aware of the problems that may be encountered when dealing with cases of stalking and harassment.
Alternatively, in less serious cases, advice from such a prosecutor may suffice. It is essential that the victim is fully aware of the decisions being made as they may directly impact on the victim's safety. Early consultation with the allocated police officer and contact with the specified Witness Care Unit are also important in ensuring that the risks in the case are understood, as well ensuring that any further offending reported is addressed as quickly as possible, as this behaviour can dramatically increase the risk for the victim.
Given that this type of crime, by its nature, is often repetitive, it is sometimes helpful for victims to be encouraged to maintain a record or diary of events. Ideally, the record should be maintained in a bound book, separately from personal details such as appointment times and other endorsements. It should also be completed as soon as possible after each event, with all entries timed and dated. This record could also be kept electronically on a computer and may be automatically timed.
For example, by the victim emailing the document to their own email address as each entry is included. Victims should be encouraged to also:. Therefore, when advising on cases of stalking and harassment, even where there has been a decision for no further action, prosecutors should remember to advise police officers to instruct victims to keep such a record.
The nature of stalking and harassment, particularly where the victim has been followed or subjected to periods of observation, will usually mean that the defendant has spent significant periods of time in the vicinity of the victim's home, place of work or other places that the victim habitually visits.
It is therefore important that police officers should consider enquiries with neighbours and other potential witnesses such as routine visitors to the area. Prosecutors should encourage police officers to consider:. In the majority of stalking and harassment cases, there will be some connection between the victim and the suspect, even if the victim is unaware of who the suspect is for example, where they have only briefly met before in passing.
Whenever a case of stalking and harassment falls within the definition of domestic violence the appropriate guidance should be followed. This should occur even when the victim or others would not necessarily classify the situation as one of domestic violence, for example, when the victim and suspect have only had a very brief intimate relationship; to the extent that the victim may not even believe that the behaviour falls within the definition of a relationship.
Primary consideration should be given, when drafting charges or accepting pleas, to ensuring that the court has adequate sentencing powers to deal with a defendant in light of the offending behaviour.
It is possible for behaviour directed at one person to harass another - so long as it can be proved that the suspect knew or ought to have known that his or her behaviour was causing harassment to another.
Victims may also be forced to alter their lifestyle choices which can include having to move home or job, restricting their social activities or otherwise altering their routines.
Also prosecutors should be aware that restricting the suspect's ability to stalk or harass a particular victim may have unintended consequences. The suspect may displace their attention from that victim to another: for example, where the suspect is motivated to harass a member of a particular profession such as a teacher, judge or police officer, they may direct further harassment towards another member of the same profession. Harassment can take place on the internet and through the misuse of email.
This is sometimes known as 'cyberstalking'. This can include the use of social networking sites, chat rooms and other forums facilitated by technology. The internet can be used for a range of purposes relating to harassment, for example:. Further guidance can be found in Communications Offences , elsewhere in the Legal Guidance. Organisations such as companies, Government departments or religious institutions may also be subjected to harassment, in furtherance of a political or other aim.
In some cases, this activity will include the harassment of individuals who work for, or who are otherwise associated with, the organisation.
When considering such cases, it is important to balance the right to legitimate protest, with the rights of any individual to be free from harassment. Section 1 1A of the PHA would potentially cover a campaign against a particular organisation, which involved actions relating to different members on different occasions.
Further guidance can be found in the Legal Guidance on Public Protests. Disputes between neighbours often include issues of harassment, which may be the result of a relationship deteriorating over a lengthy period of time.
Such disputes may include complicated counter-allegations and repeat reports to the police. These may include civil as well as criminal issues. It is important when considering such cases to determine whether there is evidence of a clearly aggrieved party and perpetrator. There may be different motivating factors which prompt the defendant's behaviour. These could include: revenge; retribution; loneliness; resentment; a desire for reconciliation; response to a perceived insult or humiliation; or a desire for control.
The defendant may have a delusional belief that an individual is in love with them termed 'erotomania' , and that sooner or later they will respond. In other cases, the behaviour may relate to the obsessive preoccupation with a particular cause or issue. These motivations will inevitably impact on the risk posed by a suspect to a victim. Information about the motivation of the suspect is crucial in informing the investigation, the approach to risk and ensuring that suspects are subject to an appropriate multi-agency response.
For example, the recognition of an individual's delusional fixation on another person can enable them to access mental health services which could assist. In 'Study of Stalkers' Mullen, Pathe, Purcell and Stuart provided a useful classification for stalking which is now generally accepted. It comprises five motivational types, that can be summarised as:.
For further information on case studies on stalking see the following link: Chartered Forensic Psychologist Dr Lorraine Sheridan - www. The Violence Against Women and Girls VAWG Strategy provides an overarching framework for crimes that have been identified as primarily, although not exclusively, committed by men against women, within a context of power and control. Harassment is included within the domestic violence strand and as such should therefore be addressed within the overall framework of VAWG.
Where appropriate, prosecutors should make links with other VAWG strands such as rape and sexual offences, honour based violence and forced marriage, child abuse, crimes against the older person, pornography, human trafficking, prostitution, and female genital mutilation.
It includes practical guidance to assist those members of staff who are victims of stalking and harassment either in a domestic or non-domestic environment. It includes information to reduce any affected employee's risk by considering:.
Prosecutors should also recognise the diversity of victims. Victims' experiences of harassment and stalking may be affected by identities distinct from gender, like their ethnicity, age, sexuality, disability, immigration status, and religion or belief. Each victim's individual experiences of harassment and stalking will be different, and some victims may encounter additional barriers to accessing justice.
For example, a young woman subjected to stalking may find it difficult to report it because she fears she will not be taken seriously because of her age. The safety and needs of each victim should be assessed on an individual basis. Cases of stalking and harassment that fall within the Government definition of domestic violence should be identified both on the file jacket for example, through a readily identifiable sticker, marking it with the letters 'DV' or using a different colour file jacket and flagged on CMS as domestic violence.
Likewise, some cases will need more than one flag to ensure that the correct case handling procedures are followed and the volume and outcomes of such cases can be accurately monitored.
There may be instances, for example, where the case also includes racism, homophobia or rape. These cases, together with cases of honour based violence, forced marriage and child abuse should be identified and cross-flagged to reflect this. Recording all of this information enables us to monitor our performance. This is particularly relevant where historically it has been more difficult to achieve a successful outcome for victims.
We are then able to identify areas where improvements need to be made including in relation to victim support and safety. It also helps ensure that if appropriate, an experienced prosecutor can be assigned to the case, and that all of the relevant applications and case handling issues can be dealt with in a timely and effective manner.
Identifying quickly and accurately the risks posed by a defendant toward a victim, group of victims or indeed a victim's family is a crucial step in increasing the safety of a victim. Cases involving stalking and harassment can sometimes mean that the victim is particularly vulnerable due to the determined and persistent nature of the suspect's behaviour.
Prosecutors should ensure that when they are presented with a case either for charge or at court, a full risk assessment has been recently conducted by the police. It is crucial that the police or other agencies involved with the victim or suspect identify all risks to the victim and others which may also include risks to the suspect , and where possible take appropriate action to reduce or remove such risks.
In some cases other professionals and agencies such as probation officers and mental health professionals may feed into this risk assessment process. Information about risk factors can be obtained from a number of sources including police information systems, victims, witnesses, other agencies and people close to the suspect and victim.
The victim, although an important source of information, is just one avenue that should be explored. In the majority of cases, we in the CPS will not have information independent of the police that can inform the process. However, where we have obtained information, for example, if a victim has telephoned the CPS about witness intimidation or additional information is gleaned by the Witness Care Unit as part of the pre-trial preparation process, this information should be fed through to the relevant officer as a priority.
In making an identification and assessment of risk, police officers should give consideration to information around:. It is essential that victims receive information on harassment advising them of the practical steps they can take to protect themselves from harm.
Police officers should be reminded of this best practise and any relevant contact numbers should be included in any correspondence.
0コメント