Harassing or threatening behavior that one individual engages in repeatedly against another. This type of harassment is referred to as either physical stalking or cyberstalking. Both physical stalking and cyberstalking may or may not be accompanied by a “credible threat of serious harm,” depending on the facts of the case. Both types of stalking are intended to control or intimidate the victim through instilling fear, stress, and/or anxiety. Both the physical stalker and the cyberstalker intend to cause psychological harm and distress to the victim. Both types of stalking have the potential to escalate and lead to the stalker assaulting and/or killing the victim. Cyberstalking may result in physical stalking.

Physical stalking

The National Institute of Justice describes physical stalking as a series of actions by the stalker against a particular person, which includes repeated instances of the stalker seeking visual or physical proximity to the victim; nonconsensual communication; or verbal, written, or implied threats or a combination of such acts, which would instill fear in a reasonable person. Physical stalking involves repeated harassing or threatening behavior, such as following a person, appearing at one's house or work, sending written messages or objects, or vandalizing another person's property.

In 2012, the Department of Justice (DOJ) reported that an estimated 1.5 percent of persons age eighteen or older were stalking victims. Individuals who were divorced or separated are at the greatest risk of being stalked compared to those who are married, never married, or widowed. While more females were stalked than males, females and males were equally likely to experience harassment. Men reported stalking incidents as often as women. Those less than thirty-five years old were more likely to be stalked than older people.

According to the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, most victims know their stalker. Slightly more than 30 percent of stalking offenders are a known, intimate partner: a current or former spouse, a cohabiting partner, or a date. Approximately 45 percent of stalking offenders are acquaintances other than intimate partners. Just under 10 percent of all stalkers are strangers. In approximately 15 percent of stalking cases, the victim does not know the identity of the stalker and thus cannot report whether he or she might be an intimate partner, acquaintance, or stranger.

Stalking victims may be required to take time from work to change a phone number, move, replace damaged property, obtain a restraining order, and/or testify in court. In the 2012 DOJ report, almost 13 percent had to take time off from work. Over 100,000 victims reported that they had been terminated from or had been asked to leave their jobs because they were being stalked.

Stalkers may also commit identity theft against victims, including opening or closing accounts, removing money from accounts, or charging purchases to a victim's credit card.

Cyberstalking

The Internet has proven to be a highly efficient way for stalkers to intimidate, terrorize, and harm their victims. Cyberstalking is the repeatd use of an electronic or Internet-capable device to pursue or harass an individual or group of people. Cyberstalking is viewed as the most dangerous type of Internet hasassment because of a credible threat of harm to the victim. Some of the key differences between physical and cyberstalking are that, with the latter, (1) a message communicated online can be sent to anyone with Internet access, is present immediately, and cannot be taken back or deleted; (2) the stalker could be anywhere in the world; (3) the stalker may easily impersonate another individual to communicate with the victim; and (4) the stalker may use third parties to contact or communicate with the v ictim.

Cyberharassment differs from cyberstalking because the former does not usually invovle a credible threat. Examples of cyberharassment includes threatening or harassing email messages, instant messages, or blog entries or websits that are intended to harrass a specific person.

Cyberstalkers post messages on various sites using the victim's personal information, including home address, phone number, and/or Social Security number. These posts are often lewd or intended to be embarrassing, and result in the victim receiving several emails, calls, or visits from individuals who read the online posts. The cyberstalkers also sign up for several online mailing lists and services using a victim's personal information.

Stalkers abuse the anonymity provided by the Internet to harass their victims. Because the identity of the stalker is often unknown to the victim, the victim often becomes more fearful. Cyberstalking is difficult to curtail and prosecute because the stalker could be far removed or very close to the victim. Because of the Internet's anonymity, it is difficult to verify a stalker's identity, gather the necessary evidence for an arrest and trace the cyberstalker to a physical location.

Stalkers almost always stalk someone they know or believe they know, as is the case with stalkers of celebrities or other public persons. While stalkers believe they know the celebrity, the celebrity most often does not know a stalker. One drawback of being a celebrity or public figure is having to deal with stalkers, who could be obsessed fans.

Corporate cyberstalking is when a company harasses a person online, or an individual or group of people harasses an organization. Corporate cyberstalking could be motivated by ideology, greed, or revenge.

Cyberstalkers are motivated by many factors: envy; pathological obsession (professional or sexual); unemployment or failures with their own job or life; the desire to intimidate and make others feel inferior; delusion, which makes the stalker believe that he or she knows the target; desire to instill fear in a person to justify the stalker's status; belief in remaining anonymous and thus getting away with it; intimidation for financial advantage or business competition; revenge over perceived or imagined rejection.

Cyberstalking evolves as technology changes. A technologically proficient cyberstalker can cause severe problems for the victim, especially because an increasing number of people use the Internet to pay bills, make social connections, do their work, share ideas, and seek employment.

Cyberstalking victims should attempt to gather as much physical evidence as possible and document each contact from the perpetrator.

While cyberstalking doesn't involve physical contact, it can be more dangerous than physical stalking. A proficient Internet user can easily locate enough of the victim's personal information, such as phone number or place of business, to determine his or her physical location.

Social networking, through websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, presents security issues for victims of stalking. A social network profile might include a victim's contact information, birthday, legal name, names of family members, and even updates on a victim's location.

If a victim has a public online profile, a stalker could easily access any information posted to the social networking account, according to Privacy Clearinghouse. Even with strong privacy settings or a private profile, a stalker might be able to access a victim's account by:

If the user decides to connect a cell phone to an online account, the user should be cautious in providing live updates on her or his location or activities. The user should avoid posting information about current or future locations or providing information that a stalker may later use locate the user.

Victims most likely will be unaware that a stalker has accessed an online social networking account. Victims should post only information that would not expose them to harm if the stalker should read it.

Cyberstalkers attempt to gather information about the victim. They may approach their victim's friends, family member, and work colleagues to obtain personal information. They may advertise for information on the Internet or hire a private detective, and they often:

As new technology has developed, cyberstalkers have developed new strategies to stalk victims. A cyberstalker can be either a stranger to the victim or have a former or present relationship. Cyberstalkers often search websites looking for opportunities to take advantage of people.

Harassment and stalking often include rape threats and other threats of violence, as well as the posting of the victim's personal information. Both activities are blamed for limiting victims' presence online or forcing them offline entirely, thereby impeding their participation in online life and undermining their autonomy, dignity, identity, and opportunities.

Cyberstalking of intimate partners includes the online harassment of a current or former romantic partner. It is a form of domestic violence, and experts say that its purpose is to control the victim by forcing social isolation and creating dependency. Harassers may send repeated insulting or threatening emails to their victims, or disrupt their victims' email use, and use the victim's account to send emails to others posing as the victim or to purchase goods or services the victim does not want. They may also use the Internet to research and compile personal information about the victim and then use that information to harass him or her.

Physical stalking is a relatively new crime. Prior to the passage of antistalking laws, victims had very few remedies. Restraining orders, often the only way to prevent stalking, were effective only after the behavior they were designed to prevent had occurred. Victims relied on assault and battery laws or restraining orders to fight stalking.

Stalking first received widespread public attention in 1980 when an unstable fan murdered John Lennon. In 1981, John Hinckley Jr.'s attempt to assassinate President Ronald Reagan was intended to impress the actress, Jodie Foster.

State antistalking legislation

In 1989, Rebecca Schaeffer, an actress who had appeared on the television show My Sister Sam, was murdered by an obsessed fan who had stalked Schaefer for two years. California was the first state to pass an antistalking statute in 1990 in the aftermath of Schaeffer's death. The elements of stalking include: (1) a credible threat, (2) conduct performed with the intent and ability to carry out the threat, and (3) the conduct causes a person to fear for her or his safety and the safety of immediate family members.

By 1993, all fifty states and the District of Columbia had an antistalking statute. The legal definition of stalking varies by jurisdiction. Some state laws require that a person must have made a credible threat of violence against the victim before he or she can be found guilty of being a stalker. Other states require only that the stalker's conduct constitute an implied threat. All legislatures recognized the need to stop stalking before it developed into a more serious threat to the victim's personal safety. Statutes were enacted to respond to behavior that would disrupt normal life for the victim and to prevent such behavior from escalating into violence. These statutes were more preventive and proactive because they were intended to criminalize certain acts of harassment before they escalated into more serious violent conduct by the stalker.

California addresses stalking in both its criminal and civil codes. California criminal law defines a stalker as someone who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another individual and who makes a credible threat with the intent to make the victim or victim's immediate family members fearful for their safety.

In the United States, most states have cyberstalking laws. Also, many law enforcement agencies have cybercrime units. Often Internet stalking is viewed with more seriousness than physical stalking. Cyberstalking is the most dangerous of Internet harassment because of the credible threat of harm it can pose. A conviction of cyberstalking can result in a restraining order, probation, and/or criminal penalties against the accused, which could include incarceration.

Federal antistalking law

The most important federal statutes intended to deter and prosecute cyberstalking are the Interstate Stalking Act, the Interstate Communications Act, the Federal Telephone Harassment Statute, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act.

Interstate Stalking Act

President Clinton signed the Interstate Stalking Act into law in 1996. Th act made it a federal crime to travel across state lines with “the intent to kill, injure, harass, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person” (18 U.S.C. 2261A). Several serious stalking cases have been prosecuted under Section 2261A, but the requirement that the stalker physically travel across state lines makes it largely inapplicable to cyberstalking cases. In addition, the travel must result in reasonable fear of death, serious bodily injury, or substantial emotional distress either to a victim or a victim's family member, spouse, or intimate partner. The act was amended in 2006 and 2013.

Section 2261A (2) makes it a federal crime to stalk another person across state, tribal, or international lines, using regular mail, email, or the Internet. The stalker must have the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, and/or cause substantial emotional distress, or to place a victim or a victim's family member, spouse, or intimate partner in fear of death or serious bodily injury.

Interstate Communications Act

Enacted in 1994, the Interstate Communications Act (18 U.S.C. 875 (c)) makes it a federal crime for someone to transmit in interstate or foreign communications any threat to kidnap or injure another person. Under 18 U.S.C. 875(c), it is a federal crime, punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000, to transmit any communication in interstate or foreign commerce containing a threat to injure the person of another. Section 875(c) includes threats transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce via the telephone, email, beepers, or the Internet. It has been interpreted to apply only to communications of actual threats. The statute would be inapplicable in a situation where the cyberstalker is engaged in a pattern of conduct intended to harass or annoy another without a specific threat. Also, it is unclear that it would apply to situations where a person harasses another person by posting messages on a bulletin board or in a chat room with the intent to encourage others to harass or annoy another person.

Federal Telephone Harassment Statute

Enacted in 1996, this federal statute (47 U.S.C. Section 223(a)(1)(C)) makes it a crime to use a telephone or other telecommunications device anonymously to annoy, abuse, harass, or threaten another person at the called number. This statute is broader than 18 U.S.C. 875 because it covers both threats and harassment. Section 223 applies, however, only to direct communications between the perpetrator and the victim. Thus, it would not apply to a cyberstalking situation where a person harasses or terrorizes the victim by posting messages on a bulletin board or in a chat room encouraging others to harass or annoy another person. In addition, Section 223 is only a misdemeanor, punishable by not more than two years in prison.

Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act

A federal statute (18 U.S.C. 2425) enacted in October 1998, it protects children against online stalking. The statute makes it a federal crime to use any means of interstate or foreign commerce (such as a telephone line or the Internet) to communicate with any person with the intent to solicit or entice a child into unlawful sexual activity. While this statute provides important protections for children, it does not cover harassing phone calls to minors that do not include intent to entice or solicit the child for illicit sexual purposes.

While current federal statutes cover many instances of cyberstalking, there remain major inadequacies in federal cyberstalking law, including that the law generally applies only to direct communication between the cyberstalker and the victim. When the cyberstalker persuades other individuals to join the harassment, the current law is grossly inadequate. While a federal stalking law is in place, it applies only to interstate travel. The perpetrator must travel across state lines, which makes the law frequently inapplicable in prosecuting stalkers.

Major cyberstalking cases

There have been several major cyberstalking cases. Some have involved the suicides of young children. In many other cases, charges either weren't brought for cyber-harassment or prosecution failed to obtain convictions.

A fourteen-year-old student in Michigan, for instance, pressed charges against her alleged rapist, which caused her to be cyberstalked and cyberbullied by other students. After she committed suicide in 2010, all charges were dropped against the defendant because the only witness was dead, despite the fact that statutory rape charges could have been pursued.

In another major cyberstalking case, college student Dharun Ravi secretly filmed his roommate's sexual liaison with another man. He then posted it online. After the victim had committed suicide, Ravi was convicted of bias intimidation and invasion of privacy in New Jersey v. Dharun Ravi. In 2012, the defendant was imprisoned for thirty days and was required to pay more than $11,000 in restitution and to serve three years of probation.

Conclusion

The federal government and the U.S. states have recognized the impact of technology in the daily lives of everyday Americans and have sought to update legislation to protect citizens against cyberstalking. Significant gaps continue, however, in legal protections and in enacting and implementing legislation against this crime. Inadequate legal protections facilitate the cyberstalker's ability to place a victim in a state of fear and causing the victim to feel defenseless. A cyberstalker can threaten the victim with danger, which empowers the offender. The law in this area is in need of improvement and must be continually revised as technology changes.

Further Reading

See also: Children's Right to privacy; Computers and privacy; Criminal justice (criminal procedure); Hacking, computer; Harrassment; Law enforcement; Telephones