Stalking As described F.B.I. Public Bulletin
December 2002
Volume 71
Number 12
Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Robert S. Mueller III
Director
Contributors' opinions and statements should
not be considered an endorsement by the FBI for any policy, program, or
service.
The attorney general has determined that the
publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public
business required by law. Use of funds for printing this periodical has been
approved by the director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin (ISSN-0014-5688)
is published monthly by the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Every state in
Behaviors
For many
reasons, stalking behaviors are quite diverse. Stalkers may ambush their
targets, phone repeatedly, pursue or follow their targets, make obscene or
threatening phone calls, display weapons, trespass, or vandalize property.9 They
may send numerous letters, deliver unwanted gifts, or restrain or confine the
objects of their obsessions. As a means of controlling the behavior of their
targets, stalkers may threaten to commit suicide or harm the victims, the
victims’ families, or even the victims’ pets. Perpetrators may attempt to limit
the amount of contact targets have with their families and friends and may
insist on knowing the whereabouts of targets and what they are doing at all
times. What they all have in common, however, is a persistent pattern of
unwanted behaviors that interfere with other persons’ abilities to control
their own lives.
A relatively
new form of stalking, cyberstalking, uses computers to stalk individuals and may take the form
of electronic mail, faxes, or harassment in Internet chat rooms. For example,
in one recent incident, a woman in
Stalking ceases for a variety of reasons. The first national
stalking study found that the victims (19 percent) or the stalkers (7 percent)
moved; the stalkers acquired new love interests (18 percent); the police warned
them to stop (15 percent); the victims talked to their stalkers (10 percent);
the authorities made arrests (9 percent); the stalkers received help (6
percent) or died (4 percent); the victims obtained new love interests (4
percent); the stalking just stopped (3 percent); or the perpetrators were
convicted of a crime (1 percent). Four percent of the cases remained
unclassified.12 Another source suggested that a 2-year period with no stalking
activity is a successful intervention;13 however, if
the stalker is incarcerated during that 2-year period, investigators should not
make the assumption that the stalker will be released with no risk of renewed
stalking efforts.
Offenders
Generally,
existing research has focused on the psychological perspectives of stalkers and
has ignored their socioeconomic characteristics. One notable exception occurred
in a study of 187 female victims of intimate relationship stalking in
Pennsylvania.14 This study found that the stalkers
ranged in age from 17 to 57 and described 57 percent as non-Hispanic whites, 37
percent as African-Americans, and 6.5 percent as other racial minorities. Of
the 100 stalkers whose education the victims knew, 77 percent had at least
attended high school and 45 percent had attended college; however, educational
background ranged from some level of elementary school through graduation from
a doctoral program. Interestingly, this research noted that stalkers with
higher educational levels were less likely to be violent and also less inclined
to make explicit threats.15 As to occupations, 69
percent of the perpetrators were employed, with 62 percent of those described
as holding blue-collar jobs compared with 37 percent in white-collar positions.
In addition, 61.7 percent of stalkers had some form of a previous criminal
record, and, of those individuals, 31 percent had a prior conviction for a
violent offense. Also, according to their targets, 72 percent of the stalkers
abused alcohol or other drugs. Sixty-five percent of the women reported
physical abuse during their relationships, with two-thirds (66 percent) stating
that alcohol or other drug use was the precipitating event for that violence.
While this profile reveals some interesting information, it remains important
to remember that it resulted from a study in a single state.
According to
the findings of the first national stalking study, approximately 87 percent of
stalkers were male.16 Men were identified as stalkers in 94 percent of cases in
which the complainants were women and 60 percent of cases in which the targets
were men. In addition, approximately 77 percent of female complainants and 64
percent of males knew their stalkers. These researchers speculated that men may
know their stalkers less often because of other considerations, such as the
involvement of gang rivalries. They also found that homosexual men may be more
at risk for stalking. The greater risk may be due to unreturned sexual
attraction or bias toward homosexuals.
Those persons
who stalked men tended to be strangers or acquaintances, rather than intimates,
such as former spouses, former boy or girlfriends, or former cohabiters. This
finding is important in developing threat assessments because those persons who
stalk strangers are more likely to be psychotic, while those who stalk sexual
intimates are more inclined to abuse alcohol or other drugs and have a
dependent personality disorder.17
Other research
also has found that stalkers often are self-conscious and lack self-esteem.
Many stalkers have menial jobs and tend to be unmarried and live alone. They
frequently have a history of being unable to sustain relationships, and they
tend to use alcohol more than nonstalkers. Many
stalkers have a history of prior stalking offenses, assaults, or substance
abuse.18 Stalkers also may have mental disorders that commonly include not only
substance dependence but also mood disorders and schizophrenia.19 Others may
have personality disorders, such as narcissism, paranoia, antisocial
personalities, borderline personality disorders, dependent disorders, or
histrionic personality disorders. If stalkers have a treatable psychiatric
disorder, some may benefit from medications or psychotherapy. Those truly antisocial
or psychopathic, however, may not benefit from treatment. In these cases, the
stalkers must be separated from their victims for the stalking behaviors to
cease.
When examining
the lives of stalkers, common themes have emerged from one researcher’s work
often cited by other writers.20 These have included a fascination with
assassins and assassinations (e.g., the shooting of former president Ronald
Reagan), death, suicide, obsessive love, a special or common destiny, and
weapons. In addition, some stalkers excessively adhere to religious beliefs or
practices and may believe that they are “cosmically connected” with their
targets. Obviously, no single potential stalker will exhibit all of these
themes. When noted by law enforcement personnel in combination with other
typical stalking behaviors, such themes should serve as potential warning
signs. In particular, law enforcement personnel should look for signs of
behavior that are sinister, disjointed, bizarre, or extremely unreasonable.21
Typologies
Clearly, the
phenomenon of stalking represents a unique nexus between psychiatry and
psychology on the one hand and law enforcement on the other. “There is no
single profile of a stalker.... Stalkers exhibit a broad range of behaviors,
motivations, and psychological traits.”22 As a consequence, several typologies
have emerged from the literature, each containing two to three categories,
based typically on some form of personality disorder. For example, research has
found that some stalkers have an “attachment disorder,” stemming from
abandonment in early childhood and resulting in the inability to maintain
normal relationships as adults. In addition, many stalkers have a narcissistic
personality in which individuals have an inflated sense of self-worth and a
need for others to focus on them.23
One of the best
known classifications comes from a review of 74 cases in which researchers
described stalkers as having erotomania, love
obsession, or simple obsession.24 Erotomania is the
strong, but mistaken, belief that the stalker’s object is in love with the
stalker. Although the exact label may vary, a number of other researchers also
have discussed this phenomenon.25 In many instances, the victim does not know
the stalker and almost always occupies an elevated station in life, making any
true relationship between the two very unlikely. Usually, the only
Stalking-Related
Web Sites
|
http://www.cyberangels.com |
|
|
|
http://www.ncvc.org/src |
|
Working to Halt On-line
Abuse (WHOA) |
http://www.haltabuse.org |
|
Stalking Victims Sanctuary |
http://www.stalkingvictims.com |
|
Survivors of Stalking |
http://www.soshelp.org |
mental disorder affecting such stalkers is the delusion
concerning the object of their attentions. Generally consisting of women who
target males, this group represents the least dangerous of the three categories
and included slightly under 10 percent of those
studied.26
The second
group, the love obsessional group, comprised
approximately 43 percent of the sample. Ninety-seven percent of those were male
stalkers, often between 30 and 40 years of age, with their victims usually
between 20 and 30 years of age. Generally, these stalkers became aware of their
targets through the media and did not know their victims directly. Twenty-five
percent of these stalkers made threats to their objects, while only 3 percent
carried out those threats.
Finally, the
third group of stalkers, those having a simple obsession, included
approximately 47.5 percent of those studied, 80 percent of whom were male.
Generally, they were socially immature and unable to develop lasting
relationships. The study found that such stalkers possibly exhibited traits
that could include extreme jealousy, insecurity, paranoia, and feelings of
helplessness and powerlessness. These stalkers frequently were in relationships
with their objects when those associations deteriorated or terminated,
generally had an emotional attachment to their victims, and were unable to let
the relationship end. If they could not restore those ties, they may have
sought retribution or attempted to ensure that no one replaced them in their
objects’ affections. Simple obsessional stalkers also
were more likely to harm their victims or their victims’ properties. They also
were willing to do whatever was necessary to achieve their goals. Substance
abuse also was common. Ninety-seven percent of this group made threats, while
30 percent actually carried them out. Such stalking instances may be more
short-lived than those in the other two categories.
Threat Assessment
Because
stalking may precede violent crimes against persons or property, early
recognition of these phenomena may provide opportunities for early intervention
to prevent subsequent violence. “Threat assessment is the term used to describe
the set of investigative and operational techniques that can be used by law
enforcement professionals to identify, assess, and manage the risks of target
violence and its potential perpetrators.”27 Threats are not necessarily
predictive in the sense that individuals being stalked always will become
victims of violence; however, threats obviously may require further
investigation.
For example,
one researcher found that only about one-half of stalkers who threatened their
victims actually acted on those threats.28 In addition, even though 43 percent
of men and 45 percent of women being stalked in that study received threats
from their stalkers, interpersonal violence only occurred on average in 20 to
25 percent of the cases. Violence took the form of grabbing, punching,
striking, or forcible fondling, but, reassuringly, homicide occurred in less
than 2 percent of the stalking cases; however, this researcher also found that
stalkers who had multiple stalking targets and who displayed serious antisocial
behavior that was not related to their delusions may be at a very high risk for
committing violence.
Researchers also have identified other risk
enhancers. For example, one study of Hollywood celebrities found that victims were
more at risk when stalkers corresponded with them for over 1 year; sought
face-to-face contact; formed detailed, plausible plans; stated specific times,
dates, and places that contact would occur; telephoned and wrote their victims;
and sent them letters originating from more than one location.29 In their
correspondence with their targets, 36 percent of the stalkers referred to other
celebrities. This has important consequences for those investigating such
crimes. When one target is identified, careful investigation may identify
others stalked by the same individual, either contemporaneously or in previous
instances. Criminal record checks may help disclose whether the stalker has
engaged in similar behaviors in the past.
Still, other
characteristics of stalkers also may indicate a high risk for injury to their
stalking targets. These include the possession/ use of weapons, past instances
of violence or hostage taking, a disregard for the consequences of violating
protection orders, access to the victim or the victim’s family, known
depression or suicidal tendencies, and histories of stalking victimizations,
mental illness, or drug use.30 Other indicators of high-risk stalkers may
include present or past threats to kill the victim or others and a high degree
of obsession, possessiveness, or jealousy.31
In contrast,
other researchers found certain factors that were not predictive, despite
common beliefs.32 Generally, they did not find
stalkers who communicated anonymously more dangerous than those who signed
their communications. Also, no link existed between stalkers who harassed their
targets with or without accompanying threats. Finally, no predictive value
necessarily existed in distinguishing between those stalkers who threatened
their victims and those stalkers who approached their targets.
Recent research
in
This research
suggested that criminal codes concerning stalking may offer one valuable, yet
underused, avenue to address stalking behaviors in domestic violence cases.
When victims present complaints of harassing and threatening behaviors,
officers always should ask whether these behaviors have occurred previously, so
as to develop the pattern of behaviors necessary to sustain stalking charges.
If officers ask these questions in all cases involving potential charges of
harassment, terroristic threats, and violations of
restraining orders, it is possible that, in some situations, interventions
could help prevent later domestic violence.
Conclusion
The phenomenon
of stalking is a complex one. Throughout the
In response to
a number of highly publicized incidents, authorities have placed more attention
on the development and implementation of legislation at the state and national
levels. Researchers also have intensified their efforts to understand stalking
behaviors, as well as the socioeconomic and psychological backgrounds of those
involved. This has led to the development of a number of typologies and efforts
concerning the accurate assessment of threats made by perpetrators. Law enforcement
and other governmental authorities need to closely monitor these events as they
encounter stalking, assess the threat that it presents, and develop their
responses.
Ethical Standards
As society has
evolved, the questions and concerns that involve ethics and ethical behavior
have grown more difficult to address. Ethical standards have become both more
complex and scrutinized by the public than at any other time in history.
Therefore, law enforcement personnel must carry out tasks assigned to them while
the rules and laws constantly change and their freedom to perform the necessary
tasks becomes obstructed. Citizens expect law enforcement officials to operate
in an efficient and professional manner without expressing personal views and
emotions. To accomplish this, law enforcement personnel must have a strict and
unwavering adherence to a code of ethics and a code of conduct.
Law enforcement
officers are professionals; they work in a skilled occupational group whose
prime consideration constitutes providing a service that benefits the public.
Because law enforcement is a profession, ethics and ethical conduct play an
important role. Ethics and ethical standards involve doing the right thing at
the right time in the right way2 for the right reason.3 With
this in mind, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)
established a code of ethics to govern the conduct of its members. This code of
ethics, originally written in 1957, was revised at the IACP conference in
Any criminal
justice system represents an apparatus society uses to enforce the standards of
conduct necessary to protect individuals and communities.6 The laws of this
nation, designed to protect and defend the public, provide the framework for a
democratic society. Law enforcement officials must perform their duties
according to these laws. Law enforcement personnel must have guidelines to
perform their duties to act in an ethical manner and to enforce specific
standards of conduct. These guidelines exist in the form of the law enforcement
code of ethics and the police code of conduct.
The law
enforcement code of ethics is used as an oath of office during the graduation
ceremony for many law enforcement personnel.
Prospective law enforcement officers offer the oath to the state in exchange for the
employment they receive.7 This oath remains morally binding throughout the
officer’s entire length of service in law enforcement. The code of ethics
states that the officer’s fundamental duties are to serve the
community; safeguard lives and property; protect the innocent against
deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation, and the peaceful
against violence or disorder; and respect the constitutional rights of
all to liberty, equality, and justice. The code of ethics also states that
officers must keep their private lives unsullied and recognize the badge as a
symbol of public faith and trust. The next to last paragraph states, “I know
that I alone am responsible for my own standard of professional performance and
will take every reasonable opportunity to enhance and improve my level of
knowledge and competence.”
The police code
of conduct works in conjunction with the law enforcement code of ethics. The
code of conduct consists of ethical mandates law enforcement officers use to
perform their duties. These guidelines include acting impartially; exercising
discretion; using only necessary force; and maintaining confidentiality,
integrity, and a professional image at all times.
These codes are
only pieces of paper with words printed on them. Society judges ethical
behavior by actions, not words. These documents provide the guidelines for law
enforcement personnel to conduct ethical investigations, use only the force
necessary to apprehend an individual, and avoid conflicts of interest and
corruption. These ethical statements, along with appropriate training and
strong leadership, encourage law enforcement officers to become members of an
ethical profession.8
Corruption
Corruption
represents one ethical issue facing law enforcement officers. Police corruption
is the lack of police integrity.9 It also constitutes one of the most
significant obstacles to positive police-public relations in today’s society.
Police corruption includes acts of brutality, excessive force, inefficiency,
and, among others, the use of public office for private gain. Eight corruption
issues face law enforcement personnel daily. These issues are the—
1) acceptance of gratuities;
2) association with known criminals without a supervisor’s knowledge or
consent;
3) disclosure or furnishing of confidential information, files,
reports, computer information, or the identity of
confidential sources to unauthorized persons;
4) disclosure of any information concerning ongoing or planned investigations
to any officer, person, agency, office, bureau, department, news medium, or
group not directly involved in the investigation, without the express consent
of the commanding officer;
5) falsification of affidavits, warrants, or other official reports;
6) harassment of, taking action against, or failing to take proper action
against any person due to race, sex, creed, religion, national origin, or
sexual orientation;
7) sexual or ethnic harassment of citizens, coworkers, or subordinates; and
8) failure to protect the rights of citizens and to follow laws, policy, and
court decisions regarding those rights with reference to probable cause,
arrest, evidence, interrogation, collection/protection and report preparation/
submission.10
Several studies
have classified corrupt situations into three different groups.11 Individual
corruption exists when a few corrupt individual officers work in a department
that actively discourages corruption. Organizational corruption represents
illegal and unprofessional acts common in a department in which both officers
and administrators are involved together in a widespread and organized practice
of corruption, contrary to written policies, regulations, and procedures.
Finally, environmental corruption exists where politically significant groups
or the collective population generally tolerates and, perhaps, actively
supports corrupt practices by law enforcement personnel, other agencies,
businesses, and average citizens.12
Corruption
exists at all levels of law enforcement, and it must be controlled. One expert
lists four methods for controlling corruption in law enforcement agencies.13
1) Strong leadership: The department’s
leadership must lead by example and avoid any questionable conduct.
2) Changes in the selection and socialization of new officers: Departments must
complete extensive background investigations to retain qualified candidates and
ensure that they receive complete training, which should include a field
training officer spending time with the new officer.
3) Changes in departmental organization and operational procedures: The
department’s leadership should establish an
investigative unit within the organization to investigate all charges of
inappropriate conduct by all personnel.
4) Changes in the environment in which the department works: This will create a
departmental code of conduct, with the help of city council or appropriate
governmental organizations, that clearly defines appropriate officer behavior.14
Law enforcement
officers cannot allow themselves to incur favors or become indebted to anyone.
As public servants, they owe their services to society. To eliminate
corruption, society must change officers’ beliefs and, more important, their
actions. However, administrators can take significant steps by ensuring that
quality leadership exists, screening applicants completely, training personnel
(newly hired officers should go through stages of training, such as an initial
training program, field training, and, finally, in-service training15), giving
them guidelines, providing them with honorable work, and encouraging them to be
team players. By taking these steps, law enforcement organizations can
eliminate the conditions that lead to corruption within their agencies.
Conclusion
To flourish as
a democratic society, the
“The mark of a
civilization is how well its policemen have breathed and absorbed the spirit of
liberty…. Police are the guardians of our civil liberties…. They have an
unequal opportunity to show the downtrodden and the momentarily despairing how
to cope in a free country.”16 They are teachers who must help set the example
for society. Ethics do not come from a piece of paper, but from within. All law
enforcement personnel must set the ethical example; therefore, not only will
law enforcement become a more ethical profession but, perhaps, society will
become more ethical as well.