Define the criminal intent element required for stalking, and compare various statutory approaches to stalking criminal intent. Define the harm element required for stalking, and compare various statutory approaches to ascertaining harm.

 

Numerous approaches have been made to criminalize stalking, and the stalking criminal act is now identified by a plethora of descriptors. In most jurisdictions, any course of behavior that credibly endangers the safety of the victim, including harassing, approaching, trying to pursue, or making an express or implied threat to injure the victim, the family member of the victim, or the property of the victim, is included in the criminal act element required for stalking. In particular, a serious threat means that the defendant has the obvious ability to carry out the threatened danger. Among criminal acts, the criminal act of stalking is distinctive in that it must occur on more than one occasion or repeatedly. The popularity of social networking sites and the frequency of defendants using the Internet to harass their victims have motivated many states to explicitly criminalize cyberstalking, which is the use of the Internet or e-mail to perpetrate stalking as a criminal act.

Depending on the jurisdiction, the criminal intent element needed for stalking also differs. The defendant must conduct the illegal act knowingly or maliciously in most states. This suggests a particular intent or purposeful action. Although a different criminal intent could support the damage offense component in states that require the victim to experience danger. States that include terrible consequences or damage in their stalking laws require, depending on the state, either specific intent or deliberately, general intent or knowingly, reckless intent, negligent motive, or strict liability (no intention) to cause the damage.

As mentioned previously, in their stalking laws, some states require a particular harm element. Depending on the jurisdiction, this aspect is described differently, but usually amounts to fear of the victim. Usually, the concern is fear of physical harm or death of the victim or of the family member of the victim, or damage to the property of the victim. In order to evaluate the hurt element, states often employ numerous measures. Subjective and objective fear, just subjective fear, or just objective fear, may be needed by states. Subjective fear means fear must genuinely be perceived by the victim. Objective fear means a rational victim will feel fear in comparable conditions.