ABSTRACT
‘Stalking’ is a nebulous crime, comprising a set of behaviours that are difficult both to define and legislate against. In 1996, a consultation paper produced by the Home Office noted that stalking was not defined in the civil or criminal law in England and Wales, but stated that ‘it can be broadly described as a series of acts which are intended to, or in fact, cause harassment to another person’ (1.2). While this may be a useful in terms of illustrating what is broadly meant by ‘stalking’, it also highlights the definitional problem: the term may be applied to almost any behaviour, but only some behaviours will constitute stalking, as long as the behaviour is of a repetitive nature. Certainly, repetition, or persistence, is one of the key features of any stalking case and must usually be present to allow for criminal charges to be brought. The persistent nature of stalking behaviours means that they can be particularly difficult to eradicate. The current chapter will draw on empirical evidence to illustrate the nature of ‘stalking’ and seek to identify whom stalkers and their victims are most likely to be. The legislative history of stalking will be briefly discussed, before outlining the potential benefits and pitfalls associated with both legal sanctions and alternative modes of intervention.
