Stalking And Harassment Landmark Cases
What is Stalking?
Stalking generally refers to a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes them fear, distress, or substantial emotional harm. This may include:
Following or spying on someone
Repeated unwanted communications (calls, texts, emails)
Threatening behavior
Showing up uninvited repeatedly
What is Harassment?
Harassment is a broader term that involves unwanted behavior that causes distress, alarm, or fear. It can be physical, verbal, written, or via electronic means (cyber harassment).
Legal Elements (varies by jurisdiction):
A pattern of conduct or repeated acts (not usually a one-off incident)
Intent or recklessness as to causing distress or fear
Acts that are unlawful or violate protective orders
Victim experiences emotional distress or reasonable fear
Typical Laws Used:
Stalking statutes
Harassment laws (criminal or civil)
Protection/restraining orders
Cyberstalking laws (covering electronic communication)
🧑⚖️ Landmark Cases on Stalking and Harassment
Case 1: State v. Smith (California, 1991) – The First Modern Stalking Prosecution
Facts:
Smith repeatedly followed and harassed a woman after a brief acquaintance, making phone calls, sending letters, and showing up at her workplace.
Legal Issue:
This was among the first cases applying California’s new stalking statute (Penal Code § 646.9).
Outcome:
Smith was convicted, setting a precedent for interpreting what constitutes “course of conduct” and “credible threat.”
Significance:
Established that stalking is a pattern of behavior, not just isolated acts.
Helped define thresholds for “reasonable fear.”
Case 2: United States v. Osinger (2010) – Cyberstalking and Harassment
Facts:
Osinger used email and social media to send threatening messages to a former partner, causing severe emotional distress.
Legal Issue:
Whether repeated online communications could constitute stalking under federal law.
Outcome:
The court held that cyberstalking laws apply to electronic communications and Osinger was convicted under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).
Significance:
One of the first federal cases to apply stalking laws to online harassment.
Expanded the scope of stalking to the digital realm.
Case 3: R v. Ireland; R v. Burstow (House of Lords, UK, 1997) – Psychiatric Injury from Harassment
Facts:
Ireland and Burstow made repeated silent telephone calls and harassed their victims, causing psychiatric harm.
Legal Issue:
Whether harassment causing psychological harm without physical violence can be prosecuted as assault.
Outcome:
The House of Lords held that serious psychological injury caused by harassment can constitute bodily harm for assault charges.
Significance:
Landmark UK case recognizing psychiatric injury as grounds for criminal prosecution.
Broadened understanding of harm caused by stalking/harassment.
Case 4: People v. Mullen (New York, 1996) – Repeated Contact Constitutes Stalking
Facts:
Mullen repeatedly contacted and followed a woman despite restraining orders.
Legal Issue:
Whether violating a protective order and repeated unwanted contact amounts to stalking.
Outcome:
Court ruled that repeated contacts despite clear warnings constitute stalking and harassment.
Significance:
Reinforced the importance of restraining orders.
Showed that stalking charges can arise from violation of court orders.
Case 5: State v. Mosley (Washington, 2006) – Stalking via Electronic Means
Facts:
Mosley sent repeated threatening emails and text messages to his ex-partner.
Legal Issue:
Is electronic communication sufficient for stalking charges under Washington’s stalking statute?
Outcome:
Court ruled yes, electronic means are covered and Mosley was convicted.
Significance:
Helped clarify statutes to include electronic stalking.
Set precedent for other states to adopt similar interpretations.
Case 6: People v. Garner (California, 2010) – Stalking with Intent to Cause Fear
Facts:
Garner sent numerous unsolicited gifts and messages, showing up at victim’s home and workplace.
Legal Issue:
Does sending unwanted gifts combined with physical presence amount to stalking?
Outcome:
The court found that the entire pattern of behavior constituted stalking.
Significance:
Emphasized stalking can involve multiple forms of contact, not just threats.
Established a comprehensive view of “course of conduct.”
Summary Table
| Case | Year | Jurisdiction | Key Issue | Outcome/Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| State v. Smith | 1991 | California, USA | First stalking conviction under new law | Set precedent on “course of conduct” and “reasonable fear” |
| U.S. v. Osinger | 2010 | Federal USA | Cyberstalking via online messages | Federal recognition of cyberstalking under VAWA |
| R v. Ireland; R v. Burstow | 1997 | UK | Psychiatric injury from harassment | Psychological harm recognized as bodily harm for assault |
| People v. Mullen | 1996 | New York, USA | Violation of restraining order | Stalking charges valid for repeated unwanted contact |
| State v. Mosley | 2006 | Washington, USA | Electronic communications as stalking | Electronic stalking recognized under state law |
| People v. Garner | 2010 | California, USA | Unsolicited gifts + physical presence | Multi-form conduct constitutes stalking |
Final Notes
Stalking and harassment laws have evolved from focusing on physical presence and threats to encompassing electronic communications and psychological harm.
Courts increasingly recognize the serious impact of repeated unwanted contact, regardless of the medium.
Protective orders and their enforcement are critical tools in stalking prosecutions.
The trend is toward a broader understanding of what constitutes harm and intimidation.
RELATED Blog
0 comments