Tracking Stalkers, Part Three

Although it is a problem as old as human society, stalking has only been deemed a crime since 1990 when California enacted the nation’s first anti-stalking law. Since then, all states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have passed laws defining and prohibiting stalking (Miller, 2001). From the Winter 2006 Forensic Examiner; written by Bruce Gross, PhD.

Mullen, Pathe, Purcell, and Stuart (2000) devised a multi-axial typology of stalkers based on an analysis of psychiatric diagnoses, underlying motivations (either love or anger/revenge), and the nature of the pre-existing relationship with the victim (i.e., current or former intimate partner, acquaintance, neighbor, co-worker/ associate, or stranger). In addition, the researchers considered contextual and background variables associated with stalking such as substance abuse, ongoing divorce and/or custody dispute, history of domestic violence and/or other criminality, escalation of stalking behaviors (in number and type), and boundary probing. The resulting typologies include rejected stalkers, who seek reconciliation and/or revenge; intimacy-seekers, who are driven by loneliness; incompetent stalkers, who are inept at or unable to form intimate relationships and hope to win their victims’ love and affection; resentful stalkers, who respond to perceived insult or humiliation; and predatory stalkers, who seek control and are focused on the goal of assault (either physical or sexual).

According to Mullen et al. (2000), the rejected and intimacy-seeking subtypes each represent 1/3 of all stalkers. Rejected stalkers are predominantly male, engage in many types of stalking behaviors, and are the most intrusive and persistent of all subtypes. Delusional disorders are most common among intimacy-seekers who, like the rejected subtype, are long-term stalkers (i.e., stalking a victim for more than one year). In contrast, stalking committed by those classified as incompetent (15% of all stalkers) tends to be comparatively simple, creates more annoyance than fear in the victim, is the most short-term of all subtypes, often transitions from one victim directly to another, and seldom results in criminal prosecution. Incompetent stalkers are the least likely of all subtypes to have criminal records or to abuse drugs. In contrast, predators are most likely to have criminal records and, given the violence inherent in this subtype, require immediate arrest and prosecution.

One of the most recently developed classification systems is that of Mohandie et al. (2006). Their relationship and context-based (RECON) typology places stalkers in one of four categories: intimate, acquaintance, public figure, and private stranger. Independent of type, Mohandie et al. discovered that 2/3 of stalkers engage in at least one unwanted and fear-evoking behavior per week (a notable number do so on a daily basis), and 78% use more than one method of stalking or approach to their victim.

As stalking is characterized by varying degrees of obsession, recidivism is a central

issue in the understanding and prevention of stalking. Mohandie et al. (2006) found that approximately 1/3 of their subjects had stalked more than one victim. Forty-nine percent of Rosenfeld’s (2003) subjects re-offended during the study’s follow-up period (2.5–13 years), with 80% of those doing so during the first year. Both substance abuse and personality (especially Cluster B) disorders were identified as predictors of recidivism, with co-morbidity the strongest of all (Rosenfeld). These findings are especially significant as the largest subtype of stalkers is characterized by personality disorders, including difficulties with attachment (Zona et al., 1993). Of note, recidivism was negatively associated with the presence of delusional disorders (Rosenfeld).

Tags: The Forensic Examiner, ACFEI, stalking, tracking stalkers, spying, anti-stalking law, 1990, spyware, cyberstalker, cyberstalking