Content uploaded by Lorraine Sheridan
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lorraine Sheridan on Mar 06, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
STALKER TYPOLOGIES: A LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE
Julian CW Boon and Lorraine Sheridan*
University of Leicester
United Kingdom
*Correspondence should be addressed to Lorraine Sheridan at: Centre for Applied
Psychology – Forensic Section, University of Leicester, 6 University Road, Leicester LE1
7RB, United Kingdom.
Telephone: +44 116 252 2460
Fax: +44 116 252 3994
E-mail: LPH1@le.ac.uk
1
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective
Abstract
In the last ten years diverse attempts have been made to produce classificatory systems of
stalkers - each of which have had differing objectives. The classificatory system of
stalking advanced in this study was developed with the specific objective of serving the
needs of law enforcement professionals working with stalking cases. Based on a large
number of documented, real-life cases (n=124), the system was designed to identify and
partition offenders according to their motivational orientations. Specifically, four principal
classifications were identified: (i) ex-partner harassment/stalking, (ii) infatuation
harassment, (iii) delusional fixation stalking, and (iv) sadistic stalking. Correspondent
implications for the assessment of threat were developed and preliminary
recommendations for good case management practice have been advanced. Inter-rater
reliability among forensic and non-forensic psychologists in the application of the system
was high (pairwise minimum >92.%) supporting the view that the system can be readily
assimilated and consistently applied by professionals working in the field.
2
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
INTRODUCTION
The global prominence of ‘stalking’ as a public menace has risen markedly over the past
decade. The activities of stalkers have captured the interest of the media, the general
public and researchers alike. The inherent need of humans to classify (Humphrey, 1984)
and for society to attempt to control aberrant behaviour has resulted in the creation of a
number of diverse stalker classification systems. These systems have been designed for
use in different fields and as such vary in their aims and scope. This paper sets forth a new
typology of stalkers which is aimed at law enforcement and which has direct implications
for the management of a heterogeneous population of offenders. Before moving on to
present this new typology, some of the more prominent stalker classification systems that
have been offered to date are outlined below.
Dietz (Dietz, Matthews, Martell et al., 1991a; Dietz, Matthews, Van Duyne et al., 1991b)
examined cases of stalkers who had targeted celebrities and other public figures, with
emphasis on identifying the level of attachment the stalker had for the victim. The crucial
difference between stalkers and ‘normal persons’, according to Dietz, is that normal
persons feel attached to celebrities or officials due to feelings of obligation or attraction.
Stalkers differ in that their activities are motivated by a wish to become closer to, or be
noticed by, their target.
In contrast, Geberth (1992) established a typology of stalkers based solely on their mental
states, labelling his stalker ‘types’ as psychopathic personality stalkers, and psychotic
personality stalkers. The former is described as being a dominant ex-partner who has lost
control of the victim and intends violence toward them, whilst the psychotic personality
stalker is said to be a delusional individual who has become obsessed with an unobtainable
object such as a film star. Such people, the typology holds, are convinced that the
3
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
individual returns their intensely affectionate feelings, and they mount a campaign of
harassment to make the victim aware of their existence. This mental state is known widely
as ‘erotomania’, a delusional disorder in which the sufferer believes that the target of
attention - generally a person of higher social and economic status - bears a genuine
reciprocal love for them (American Psychiatric Association, 1994).
Some of the existing literature was reviewed by Holmes (1993), who suggested there were
six different types of stalkers based on the nature of the victim. These comprised:
celebrity, lust, hit, love-scorned, political and domestic stalkers. These labels are largely
self-explanatory. For instance, the celebrity stalker is described as someone who harasses
only those prominent in the entertainment field, while the domestic stalker is described as
being a former partner of the target. The lust stalker was articulated by Holmes as being
motivated by sex, stalking one victim after another in a serial fashion. The hit stalker
differs from the others in this classification, in that these individuals are hired by a third
party to murder a specific target for profit, stalking their victims first to try and establish
their habits.
A further typology of stalking was advanced by McAnaney, Curliss and Abeyta-Price
(1993), again based on a review of the psychological, psychiatric and forensic literature.
This four-fold classification comprised: erotomanic, borderline erotomanic, former
intimate and sociopathic stalkers. In this system, sociopathic stalkers were said to be
otherwise known as serial murderers and serial rapists who develop a criteria of an “ideal
victim”. Three of these four stalker types were said to have a delusional mental illness or
be personality disordered.
4
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Zona, Sharma and Lane (1993) created a dominant classification system of stalkers which
is still employed by many US police forces. These researchers classified 74 cases into
three categories: erotomanic, love obsessional, and simple obsessional. Under this system,
love obsessionals are said to be similar to erotomanics in many ways, but with the
distinction that love obsessionals know their victims only through the media. In the case
of simple obsessionals, a prior relationship is said to have existed between stalker and
victim, and the stalking is initiated following the end of a relationship, or where the stalker
perceives that s/he has been mistreated.
Kienlen, Birmingham, Solberg, O’Regan and Meloy (1997) divided stalkers into two
groups according to whether they were or were not judged to be psychotic. Unlike
Geberth, the authors did not assume that all stalkers were mentally ill or personality
disordered. Finally, Mullen, Pathé and Purcell (2000) have recently produced a detailed
classification of five stalker types: rejected, intimacy seeking, resentful, predatory and
incompetent. Their multi-axial approach incorporates the context for the stalking and
stalker motivations, prior stalker-victim relationship, and the stalker’s psychiatric status.
Although the various approaches to classifying stalkers and their victims have much to
offer to both researchers and practitioners, many have shortfalls and are incomplete.
Some are too simple, given that the population is heterogeneous and probably co-morbid
for a range of mental disorders. Others are difficult to decipher and many stalkers may fall
either between two categories or may fit into more than one. A more frustrating problem
is that most typologies fail to offer accessible implications for case management. It is
important to remember however, that any classification of stalkers will likely vary in
accordance with the goals of the group who develop it (Mullen, Pathé and Purcell, 2000).
Mullen et al. further suggest that the most valuable stalker taxonomy is the one that best
5
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
serves the needs of the user group. This is a valid argument so long as typologies have
been tested and are based on adequate samples. Whilst many of the classifications
outlined above have their origins in the fields of mental health, the system that is advanced
in this paper is geared to being of greatest use to those in the law enforcement professions.
That is, those who require guidance as to understanding patterns in offenders’ motivation
and articulating the contingent ramifications for good practice in case management.
METHOD
The methodology employed consisted of three distinct stages, and these are detailed
below.
Stage one - 124 Stalking cases
One of the authors is an Association of Chief Police Officers - UK (ACPO) accredited
psychological profiler with experience of working with the Police on relatively minor
stalking cases through to those involving homicide. The second author has been
researching stalking and has conducted in depth interviews with victims for a period in
excess of four years. The project had access to a database of 124 stalking cases, each of
which had been detailed on purpose designed research instruments. These pro formas
explored a number of diverse facets of stalking, which covered detail relating to:
•demographic data for the victim and the stalker,
•full details of the stalking: how it began; qualitative changes and constants over time,
•how the stalking ended (if applicable),
•perceived exacerbating and alleviating factors,
•the primary emotions experienced by victims and how these evolved over time,
6
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
•the reactions of significant others in the victim’ life,
•the response of the professional agencies involved.
The data were originally collected from members of two prominent UK self-help groups
which had been set up to aid victims and ex-victims of stalking.
Stage two - Stalker taxonomy
(i) initial phase
Each of the authors reviewed the entire 124 case data set with a view to distilling a
classificatory system which they independently judged to be the most effective in
articulating the cases from a law enforcement perspective. In adapting their decision-
making to this orientation it was necessary to advance common, fundamental assessment
criteria which would serve the needs of such an objective. In this regard two primary
imperatives were identified. First, that the system should be developed with a view to
being geared to the investigating needs of law enforcement agencies. Specifically, the
system should be aimed at being: (i) jargon-free and comprehensible for officers; (ii)
readily applicable to cases as they emerge and unfold in the field; and (iii), it should be
capable of generating specific stratagem for good practice in the management of differing
cases. Second, while it should be as simple and economical an account of the data-set as
possible, the typology should retain sufficient accuracy and goodness-of-fit to reality to be
of operational utility.
In addition to these judgmental heuristics, two further guiding principles were adopted for
use by the authors when identifying their respective systems. First, that apriori there
should be no pre-set limit to the numbers of categories which were to be deemed desirable
7
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
to meet the above objectives. That is to say in principle the raters could, in extremis
specify either one category ‘stalking’ containing 124 cases, or alternatively, define all 124
cases as being functionally distinct form of stalking. Second, there was no governance as
to the relevant proportions of the data to which any category was constrained - it being
accepted that some forms of stalking and harassment may be markedly more common than
others.
(ii) secondary phase
Each reviewer having conducted their exploration of the data from the above orientation
then advanced their independently derived pilot classification system. This yielded two
sets of categories with a strong degree of overlap - please see results below. Thereafter
the reviewers discussed their respective terminology and agreed a common,
nomenclature for the purpose of stage three of the analysis. In discussing the most
appropriate way to refine the category terms to be adopted for stage three, two particular
considerations took precedence. First, the terms adopted were to be readily
understandable to a non-psychology/psychiatry audience. Second, in the effort to achieve
ready comprehensibility, nothing should compromise the understanding of any particular
case in terms of offender motivation and the contingent implications for case management.
The two researchers thereafter agreed a set of common characteristics for each of the four
typologies. In addition, they generated associated case management stratagem based on
the information contained in the victims reports. Specifically, this information related to
the nature of the underlying threat in any given typology, and the associated effective,
non-effective, and potentially exacerbating intervention strategies.
Stage 3 - Assessing the taxonomy
8
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
This concluding phase of the analyses was aimed at testing the reliability of the emergent
system. In order to achieve this, the two authors together with two further psychologists
who did not have a forensic background, independently categorised each of the 124 cases
according to the system. Inter-rater concordance rates were then calculated.
RESULTS
1. Details of the 124 cases
Before presenting the stalker classification system, basic details of the 124 cases are
provided. These are included for two reasons. First, so that an overview of some of the
features of stalking in a UK sample can be presented. Secondly, it is necessary to provide
some of the material analysed by the authors to illustrate the nature of that which they
were working with in making their judgements when initially constructing their respective
taxonomies.
Demographic characteristics of victims
The majority of the 124 victims (92.7%) were female. Victim age at the beginning of the
stalking ranged from 14 to 70, with a mean age of 33.10 (SD 11.26). All victims except
one described themselves as white in ethnic origin, and one as Asian. When their stalking
began, 48.3% (60) were employed in professional or clerical occupations. However, this
figure had fallen to 20.9% (26) at the time of filling in the questionnaires. Also, the
number of victims who were now unemployed or were working in unskilled or semi-
skilled jobs rose from 18.6% (23) to 51.6% (64).
9
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Demographic characteristics of stalkers
Just eight of the stalkers were female. In three cases the gender of the perpetrator was
unknown. Of the eight male victims, four were stalked by other males, and four by
females. Two of the remaining female stalkers targeted their former same-sex partners.
At the start of the harassment, the stalkers ranged in age from 11 to 73, with a mean age
of 36.30 years (SD 11.31). Thus, they tended to be slightly older than their victims. As
regards the ethnic origin of the stalkers, 93.5% (116) were described as white British or
Irish, four as Arabic, two as Asian, one as Afro-Caribbean, and one as Native American
Indian. The victims reported that when the stalking episode began, 25.8% of the stalkers
(32) were unemployed, and 15.3% (19) had semi-skilled occupations. Almost one third
(30.6%, or 38) were employed in clerical or professional fields. Three more were self-
employed, and in 14 cases the victim did not know the stalker’s occupation. Unlike the
occupations of the victims, those of the stalkers did not change significantly over time.
This was despite the fact 119 stalkers (96%) were reported to the police, and 51 had legal
action taken against them.
Duration
At the time of completing the questionnaires, 65.3% of the victims (81) were still being
harassed. Of those for whom their stalking had ended, the mean total length of
continuous harassment was 52.2 months (SD 73.2 months). The minimum reported
stalking episode was six months, and the maximum was 468 months. Where
stalking was still ongoing (43 cases), the mean recorded length of ongoing
harassment was somewhat longer (116.9 months, SD 104.5 months).
‘Serial stalking’
Over a third of victims (38.7%, or 48) claimed that their stalker had also targeted at least
one other person who was unconnected with themselves. Sixty-eight more were unsure.
10
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Just 12 of the 48 ‘serial stalkers’ had had a previous relationship with the victims, and all
these had previously stalked other ex-partners. Forty-four of the 48 were reported to
have stalked others prior to stalking victims from our sample, and three more were said to
have stalked others at the same time that they targeted our subjects. One of the three
female stalkers was said to have stalked others (males and females) before, during and
after the experience of the victim in this study.
The act of stalking may not always be a lone venture. In almost half of cases (39.5%, or
49) the stalker was reported to have enlisted the help of others during their harassment
campaign. In 31 cases, these assistants were friends of the stalker, in 7 cases they were
relatives, in two cases the stalker’s partner was said to be involved, and in a further 7
cases, individuals from two or more of these categories. In two cases, members of the
victims’ families were said to have assisted the stalker. Furthermore, 70.2% of stalkers
(87) were reported as having attempted to glean information about the victim from the
victim’s family, friends and workmates.
Victim-stalker prior relationship
In 17.7% of cases (22), there had been no prior relationship between victim and stalker.
In 46% of cases (57), the stalker was a former partner of the victim, and was an
acquaintance in 33.9% of cases (42). Of these 42 cases, the stalker was a workmate in 23
instances, a neighbour in 13, and a family friend in six. In three cases, the identity of the
stalker was unknown to the victim, and therefore their prior relationship could not be
established.
11
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
The changing behaviour of the stalker over time
As the stalking went on, the stalkers in this sample decreased the amount of time in which
they were proximal to the victim, but they also became more violent. Ninety victims
(72.6%) said that the stalking had changed over time (19 more said it had not). Of these,
82 said that the stalking had intensified, and just eight said it became less intense.
Effects on the victim
The victims were asked how the stalking made them feel. Almost a quarter (22.6%, or
28) said that they felt fearful, 16.1% (20) that they felt terrorised, 7.3% (9) described
angry feelings, 6.5% (8) said they felt intimidated, and 5.6% (7) said that they
predominately felt powerless. Smaller proportions of the victims said that they felt
imprisoned (5), upset (4), or that they experienced a complete loss of self-esteem (2).
Thirty nine however said that they experienced all of these emotions as a direct result of
being stalked.
Only 12 of the 124 victims said that they had not made any lifestyle changes as a result of
their stalking. Twenty-five (20.2%) described how they had changed their behaviour, for
example by altering their appearance or by frequenting different shops or entertainment
venues. Five said that they had had to move house, and four that they had been forced to
alter their telephone number. Twenty-seven however (21.8%), reported that they had
changed their behaviour and their telephone number. Almost 40% (49) said that they had
changed their behaviour, telephone number, and had been forced to relocate.
2. Initial classifications
12
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
At the second stage of the method (phase i), the authors produced provisional stalker
categorisations from the 124 cases. These emerged as follows (in order of perceived
prevalence, most prevalent listed first):
13
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Author 1 Author 2
Ex-intimate stalking The ex-partner harasser/stalker
Infatuation harassment The romantic attachment stalker
Delusional fixation stalking The psychotic stalker
Sadistic stalking The psychopathic stalker
Emergent nomenclature
At phase (ii), following discussion, the nomenclature of the four main typologies was
agreed as follows:
Ex-partner harassment/stalking
Infatuation harassment
Delusional fixation stalking
Sadistic stalking.
Reliability assessment
The one hundred and twenty four sample stalking cases were by assessed by two further
independent raters employing the typologies. Table 1 shows that there were high levels of
concordance among the raters, suggesting that the inherent reliability of the system and
inter-rater consistency was also high.
- Table 1 about here -
14
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
3. The typologies
On the basis of the 124 cases outlined above, the authors piloted a stalker classification
system. There are four major stalker typologies, two of which comprise two further sub-
sections. The system as developed with a view toward facilitating law enforcement and
ergo, characteristics of each category are first presented, followed by clear and specific
suggestions for case management. The degree to which each category was represented in
the sample of 124 cases is shown in parentheses following their respective titles, these
having been calculated on the basis of the mean average ratings of the raters in phase 3 of
the analysis.
Typology 1: Ex-partner harassment/stalking (50%)
Characteristics
•bitterness/hate = linked to relationship’s history (past orientation)
•hot-headed anger/hostility (cf. sadist’s cold need for control)
•prior relationship involving domestic violence which turns to more public violence and
verbal abuse
•overt threats, particularly where placed in conjunction with recrimination and reference
to perceived issues of contention
•recruitment of friends and family to perpetuate a campaign of hate
•motivating issues relate to custody/property/finance (associated issues of
power/control/freedom)
•new relationships engender jealousy and aggressive behaviour
•3rd party abuse (verbal and physical), e.g. family members of and known supporters of
the victim
•partisanship on both sides
•nature of harassment characterised by: high levels of physical violence, high levels of
verbal threat, property damage
•triggers for harassment both spontaneous (e.g. following a chance encounter) and pre-
meditated (e.g. sitting in a car outside the victim’s home)
•activity tending towards being anger driven and impulsivity with corresponding lack of
concern about coming to Police attention
15
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
•perpetrator age emerged as diverse and reflective of time of onset of strife in
relationship
Case management implications
•high risk of violence
•high risk of property damage
•generalised anger, but the results show a need to take seriously any specific threats
made
•any unnecessary retaliation - financial, legal, physical or verbal - should be curbed to an
absolute minimum
•victim should avoid wherever possible frequenting same venues as offender
•in extremis consider re-location with physical distance being even more important than
secrecy
Typology 2: Infatuation harassment (18.5%)
Characteristics
•target is ‘beloved’ rather than ‘victim’
•beloved is all pervasive in thoughts
•world and events are interpreted in relation to beloved
•beloved is focus of fantasy
•focus of fantasy romantic and positive
•intense yearning (cf. anger)
•particular emphasis on hope of what might be (future orientation)
•beloved sought out with non-malicious ruses e.g. billet-doux under windscreen wiper,
hanging around and pretending it’s a chance encounter, quizzing friends and associates
regarding any aspects of the beloved
•low levels of danger
•harassment not characterised by threats, macabre gifts and negative intervention (cf.
sinister and intrusion of sadist below)
•perpetrator age typically teenage or mid-life
16
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Case management implications
Young Love
•Elevation of the cognitive perspective
- careful and thorough explanation regarding the law and how upsetting the whole thing is
to the victim
- adoption of symPathétic stance in explaining how the relationship has been misconstrued
Midlife love
•Again cognitive elevation but with:
- possible exploration of placing physical distance between parties e.g. a work transfer
- also address possible difficulties resulting from ‘storge’ or discord in existing relationship
through counselling
Typology 3: Delusional fixation stalking (15.3%)
Where dangerous
Characteristics
•stalker tends to be incoherent yet victim fixated (orientation the present)
•victim tends to be at high risk of physical violence and sexual assault
•perpetrator likely to have come to the notice of police and mental health e.g. borderline
personality disorder, episodic schizophrenia
•perpetrator likely to have a history of sexual problems and offences, including stalking
•activity is characterised by the incessant bombarding with telephone calls, letters, visits
to workplace
•behavioural patterns lacking in coherence, appearing in diverse places, at irregular times
•content of material sent by and conversation of perpetrator => unsubtle,
sexual/obscene, and disjointed semantically
•stalkers tend to couch their statements of love in terms of sexual intent towards victim
(cf. romantic stance of infatuated harasser)
•stalkers held belief in relationship even though there has been no prior conversation
•victims are male or female and tend to have some form of elevated/noteworthy status:
- professionals (e.g. GPs, University lecturers)
- celebrities (ibid.)
- unfamous but local and attractive figures
Case management implications
17
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
•not responsive to reason or rejection
•refer to a forensic psychiatrist for assessment (although likely been assessed already)
Where less dangerous
Characteristics
•stalkers hold the delusional conviction that there is an extant, idealised relationship
(present and future orientation)
•stalker scarcely knows victim
•activity not characterised by threats - just the stated belief that the victim wants to be
with him (cf. sadistic stalkers’ similar statements but with sinister twists such as “in
heaven” or simply as a means of accentuating the victim’s feelings of despair that
nothing works)
•stalker not amenable to reason from the victim (cf. (i) infatuation harassment where
clarity can attenuate the behaviour and (ii) sadistic stalking where the perpetrator
consciously exploits non-response to victims’ appeals as a means of demonstrating
helplessness)
•stalker capable of a complete construction of a fantasy of an extant, reciprocated
relationship as though victim was in accord and consensual
•in the event of an eventual submerged perception that relationship is not fitting with the
perpetrator’s deluded perception - with rationalisation that it is someone else’s fault
(e.g. victim’s husband putting demons in her head)
•in the event of an individual being identified as thwarting the relationship, there is
contingent element of danger - particularly where that individual is perceived by the
stalker as being dangerous to victim
•victims tended to be female professionals
Case management implications
•victim should seek legal remedy
•victim should be advised not to respond as far as possible
•if absolutely necessary to respond to the offender, the victims should be advised to do
so with a clear negation of the situation and non-angry requests for him to go away
•again if absolutely necessary to respond to the offender, the victim should never argue
and keep the encounter down to a minimum
•legal agencies should be aware that the stalker is not responsive to reason or rejection
18
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Typology 4: Sadistic stalking (12.9%)
Characteristics
•victim is an obsessive target of the offender, and who’s life is seen as quarry and prey
(incremental orientation)
•victim selection criteria is primarily rooted in the victim being:
(i) someone worthy of spoiling, i.e. someone who is perceived by the stalker at the
commencement as being:
- happy
- ‘good’
- stable
- content
and (ii) lacking in the victim’s perception any just rationale as to why she was targeted
•initial low level acquaintance
•apparently benign initially but unlike infatuation harassment the means of intervention
tend to have negative orientation designed to disconcert, unnerve, and ergo take power
away from the victim
- notes left in victim’s locked car in order to unsettle target (cf. billet-doux of infatuated
harassment)
- subtle evidence being left of having been in contact with the victim’s personal items e.g.
rifled underwear drawer, re-ordering/removal of private papers, cigarette ends left in
ash trays, toilet having been used etc.
- ‘helping’ mend victims car that stalker had previously disabled
•thereafter progressive escalation of control over all aspects (i.e. social, historical,
professional, financial, physical) of the victim’s life
•offender gratification is rooted in the desire to extract evidence of the victim’s
powerlessness with inverse implications for his power => sadism
•additional implication => self-perpetuating in desire to hone down relentlessly on
individual victim(s)
•emotional coldness, deliberateness and psychopathy (cf. the heated nature of ex-partner
harassment)
•tended to have a history of stalking behaviour and the controlling of others
•stalker tended to broaden out targets to family and friends in a bid to isolate the victim
and further enhance his control
•communications tended to be a blend of loving and threatening (not hate) designed to
de-stabilise and confuse the victim
•threats were either overt (“We’re going to die together”) or subtle (delivery of dead
roses)
•stalker could be highly dangerous - in particular with psychological violence geared to
the controlling of the victim with fear, loss of privacy and the curtailment of her social
world
•physical violence was also entirely possible - especially by means which undermine the
victim’s confidence in matters normally taken for granted e.g. disabling brake cables,
disarming safety equipment, cutting power off
19
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
•sexual content of communications was aimed primarily to intimidate through the
victim’s humiliation, disgust and general undermining of self-esteem
•the older the offender, the more likely he would have enacted sadistic stalking before
and would not be likely to offend after 40 years of age if not engaged in such stalking
before
•victim was likely to be re-visited after a seeming hiatus
Case management implications
•should be taken very seriously
•acknowledge from outset that the stalker activity will be very difficult to eradicate
•acknowledge that there is no point whatsoever in appealing to the offender - indeed will
exacerbate the problem
•never believe any assurances, alternative versions of events etc. which are given by the
offender
•however, record them for use in legal action later
•the victim should be given as much understanding and support as can be made available
•the victim should not be given false or unrealistic assurance or guarantees that s/he will
be protected
•the victim should carefully consider relocation. Geographical emphasis being less on
distance per se, and more on where the offender is least able to find the victim
•the police should have in mind that the sadistic stalker will be likely to:
(i) carefully construct and calculate their activity to simultaneously minimise the risk of
intervention by authorities while retaining maximum impact on victim,
(ii) be almost impervious to intervention since the overcoming of obstacles provides new
(iii) and potent means of demonstrating the victim’s powerlessness (ergo self-
perpetuating) and,
(iii) if jailed will continue both personally and vicariously with the use of a network.
An overview distillation of the above in terms the potential for this system to relate to the
needs of law enforcement professionals involved in stalking case management is provided
in Table 2.
- Table 2 about here -
DISCUSSION
20
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
The methodology of this study has been designed to develop a classificatory system of
stalking which is oriented towards the needs of law enforcement agencies. A particular
objective was to provide a system which could aid the understanding of offender
behaviour and use that understanding to articulate strategies for good case management.
In noting this, it is important to be clear that it is not suggested that this classificatory
system is in any sense superior to the contemporary systems devised for differing
objectives. Instead it is suggested that in specifically focusing on the need to meet the
requirements of professionals dealing with emergent and ongoing stalking cases, the
classifications will correspondingly differ in content and form - reflecting their differing
operational objectives.
In assessing the utility of the framework for this purpose, three main aspects must be
considered. First the classification system’s reliability - that is the consistency with which
it can be applied across cases by different raters. Second the degree to which it is readily
comprehensible and relatively easy to apply. Third the system’s validity - that is, whether
the typologies accurately identify stalkers in terms of their differing motivational
perspectives and whether they articulate valid case management suggestions. In terms of
the reliability, the high concordance rates would seem to support the view that the system
is remarkably robust, in that raters strongly tended to agree which cases should be
grouped into which categories. Likewise the high concordance rates would support the
view that the system can be readily assimilated by professionals with differing law-
enforcement perspectives and be applied consistently to diverse cases.
In terms of assessing the validity of the system, the ultimate test will be how effectively it
can be deployed in case management under real-life conditions. Although preliminary at
this stage, early indications from professionals involved in training officers in identifying
21
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
stalkers and handling cases has been encouraging. Additionally there are indications that
the system can be helpful across different legal systems - it having received positive
feedback from people working in both the US (W. Maxey, personal comunication, April
2000; K. Wells, personal communication, April 2000) and the UK (H. Brown, personal
communication, April 2000). In some ways perhaps it would be surprising if the system
did not have inherent validity for use as a law enforcement tool since its genesis is
fundamental to those concerns - namely offenders’ behaviour and victims’ experience.
The validity of the results may however be affected in terms of the representation of the
relative proportions of cases which emerged in each category. The victim sample on
which it is based was self-referring and therefore more likely to include more serious
instances of stalking. Victims of more minor stalking and harassment may be
correspondingly both less likely to report incidents, and, more likely to deal with the
situation themselves. Therefore the true proportion of, for example, sadistic stalking -
when taken in the context of stalking and harassment offenders taken in their entirety -
may be less than the 13% found in this study. However, in view of the law enforcement
objectives of the system, such a loading towards the more serious end of the behavioural
spectrum could be viewed as being appropriate. This is because it would more accurately
reflect the particular profile of cases which are most likely to confront the professionals
concerned.
Before looking more closely at the implications for threat assessment it is worth stating in
overview terms the rationale for having a classificatory system to help law enforcement
agencies. In essence it should be able to help place order on and prioritise the large
diversity of potentially important details in any given case. However beyond that, it
should also be able to articulate the significance of case details in relation to the
motivational context of the offender. Two different cases may have superficial similarity
22
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
in a wide variety of respects, yet have totally different implications for understanding the
potential threat to the victim. For example, an infatuation harassment ‘offender’ and a
sadistic stalker may both: send unwanted flowers, leave letters, follow their victim, glean
information from the victim’s friends and relatives, appear from nowhere etc. Yet in spite
of such seemingly apparent similarities - the motivational context dramatically transforms:
(i) the appropriate understanding of the psychology underpinning the behaviour, (ii) the
degree and nature of the threat to the victim, and (iii), the criteria for selecting and
adopting case management strategies.
In order to be concise, one example of how a particular behaviour can be interpreted
differently as a function of the typology of the offender will have to suffice. The data
show that it is very common for stalkers and/or harassers to send forms of written
communication. Variously the nature of the communication will be determined by the
nature of the stalker. For example if an ex-partner harassment/stalker sends a
communication it is likely to be highly volatile in tone and refer to property, possessions,
parental rights or past grievances. By contrast when an infatuated harasser writes it will
tend to be idealised and without threat. However if the case has been classified as being
that of a delusional-fixated stalker then the communication is likely to be incoherent,
sexual in content and part of a torrent of similar material. A sadistic stalker’s written
communications by further contrast can often be seemingly harmless notes. However,
when taken in their collective context they can have the potential to be very violent both
physically and psychologically. The point being made is that is that in developing the case
management suggestions it was necessary to look beyond any given instance or exemplar
of stalker/harasser behaviour since in different contexts the same behaviour can have
radically different implications for threat assessment. Instead of solely looking at the
23
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
offender behaviour per se it is also necessary to place that information in the motivational
context of the category into which the offender most accurately fits.
Moving now to the implications of the system for threat assessment it indicates that all but
the infatuation harassment group have the potential for danger. However the nature of the
danger and the triggers which cause it differ among the three remaining categories. In
addition the ability to predict the likelihood of threatening and dangerous stalking
behaviour occurring also differs among the these three groups. Specifically, the data
suggest that the most predictable of the three emerged as being ex-partner/harassment
stalking. Triggers for the verbal and physical abuse perpetrated by this stalker group were
characterised as being physical proximity, legal disputes, chance meetings and partisan
hostile group allegiance. In addition to being the most predictable in terms of identifying
precursors to violence, this group also emerged as the one which was least intractable to
identify ways of attenuating danger. Among the effective management strategies were any
measures that: (i) limited as far as possible accelerents to existing grievances, (ii) curtailed
meetings both of the individuals and their respective associates, and (iii), increased
geographical distance between the parties concerned.
By contrast geographical distance made little or no difference in the cases classified as
being sadistic stalking. Indeed attempts by the victim to evade the sadistic stalker tended
to exacerbate his attempts and to fuel his determination to elevate the victim’s sense of
powerlessness by tracking her down. Only in cases where the victim removed to a new
identity beyond the reach of being discovered by the sadistic stalker did victims’ in this
group evade further harassment. In addition the nature of the sadistic stalking differed
again from the other groups, instead having hallmarks of offenders acting in a relentless,
cold, calculated and meticulous fashion, and making incremental attempts to induce
24
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
helplessness in the victims (for a full description of the sadistic personality and its
relationship to stalking see Boon and Sheridan, in press).
As outlined above the delusional-fixated stalker from a law enforcement perspective, is in
contrast to the sadistic stalker, very much more likely to have committed and to have
continued committing obvious offences. Although not meticulous and planned in the way
of the sadistic stalker, the delusional-fixated stalker nevertheless emerged as having the
capacity to be very dangerous. Such intervention techniques as did have an impact tended
to come from those professionals involved with attempting to ensure that the offenders
were taking the necessary medication. In the ‘less dangerous’ sub-group of delusional
fixated stalker, there was little evidence that any intervention was effective in eradicating
the offender’s fixation on the victim. As in other studies relating to erotomania there was
however some evidence that over lengthy time periods the offender eventually changed
his/her perspective regarding the victim’s motivation. This may be illustrated by an
example from one of the 124 cases. A married male formed a delusional fixation for a
married female bank clerk whom he barely knew. His delusional orientation moved over
time through three phases. Initially he behaved as if she would immediately leave her
husband for him. Then after several weeks his account of her ignoring him moved to an
apparent belief that she did not want to hurt her husband. Finally after several months, the
orientation changed again, this time to a belief that the victim’s husband had put voices
into her head to dissuade her from having a relationship with the offender. At no time did
the offender threaten the victim or her husband but the delusional fixation remains to this
date and the offender’s own career and family life have been devastated.
CONCLUSIONS
25
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
As noted above, the system which has been advanced has been designed for a specific
purpose and is intended to complement rather than supplant others which have been
developed for alternative purposes. Training programmes in the use of this system for
professionals involved in the management of stalking cases take at least three days. It is
therefore not possible within the confines of a paper to move exhaustively through the
case management implications of the typologies. However as guide of the issues involved
in using the system in the field, Table 2 provides a general overview. It is at this point
premature to state unequivocally that this system is effective across diverse Western
countries and future work will be addressed at looking closely at this. In addition as the
phenomenon of stalking itself becomes more widely known and understood it may well be
that the system will need updating to reflect such change.
26
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
References
American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, 4th ed. Washington, DC: APA.
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (in press). The sadistic stalker. In J.C.W. Boon and L.
Sheridan (Eds.). Psychosexual harassment and stalking: The nature, investigation and
punishment of criminal obsessive behaviour. Chichester: Wiley.
Dietz, P.E., Matthews, D.B., Martell, D.A., et al. (1991a). Threatening and otherwise
inappropriate letters to members of the United States Congress. Journal of Forensic
Sciences, 36, 1445-68.
Dietz, P.E., Matthews, D.B., Van Duyne, C., et al. (1991b). Threatening and otherwise
inappropriate letters to Hollywood celebrities. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36, 185-209.
Geberth, V.J. (1992). Stalkers. Law and Order, 10, 1-6.
Holmes, R.H. (1993). Stalking in America: Types and methods of criminal stalkers.
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 9, 317-27.
Humphrey, N. (1984). Consciousness regained: Chapters in the development of mind.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Kienlen, K.K., Birmingham, D.L., Solberg, K.B, O’Regan, J.T. and Meloy, J.R. (1997).
A comparative study of psychotic and nonpsychotic stalking. Journal of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 25, 317-34.
McAnaney, K., Curliss, L. and Abeyta-Price, C.E. (1993). From imprudence to crime:
anti-stalking laws. Notre Dame Law Review, 68, 819-909.
Mullen, P.E., Pathé, M. and Purcell, R. (2000). Stalkers and their Victims. Cambridge
University Press.
Office of the District Attorney of San Diego. (2000). Personal Communication
Zona, M.A., Sharma, K.K., and Lane, J. (1993). A comparative study of erotomanic and
obsessional subjects in a forensic sample. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 38, 894-903.
28
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Table 1: Inter-rater reliability assessment
Author 1:
ACPO
accredited
profiler
Author 2:
Stalking
researcher
Independent
rater 1:
Non-forensic
psychologist
Independent
rater 2:
Non-forensic
psychologist
Author 1:
ACPO
Accredited
profiler
/ 98.4% 96% 95.2%
Author 2:
Stalking
researcher
98.4% / 95.2% 94.4%
Independent
rater 1:
Non-forensic
psychologist
96% 95.2% / 92.7%
Independent
rater 2:
Non-forensic
psychologist
95.2% 94.4% 92.7% /
29
Boon, J.C.W. and Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: A law enforcement perspective. Journal of
Threat Assessment, 1, 75-97.
Table 2: Overview of classification system
Category and Status
Ex-partner Infatuation Delusional Sadistic
Harassment/ Harassment -fixated Stalking
Stalking Stalking
Attribute
Duration Long term Short Long Long
(if addressed) (while in
vicinity)
Victim Anger/fear/ Nuisance/ Fear/ Fear/
perception hate Embarrassment bewilderment helpless
Victim risk proximity/ Low High High
personal
circumstance
dependent
Ability to Potential High Low Very
intervene low
Techniques re-location Sensitive Perpetrator Secret re-
to minimise (distance criterion) explanation referred to location/
threat (e.g.) reasonable (young)/job re- forensic maximum
settlements location (adult) psychiatrist support
Motive Hate/resentment Love Fixation Control
Victim Hate/ Object Proximity/ Lack (sic.)
selection resentment/ of physical of apparent
criteria resources desire attraction obvious
reason
Probability Geography/ Low Opportunity Very
of victim circumstance related high
re-visitspecific
30
