Stalking By Proxy

Stalking By Proxy involves the use of law enforcement and, or, another agency, individuals, to track a stalking target/victim. When utilized by vengeful female stalkers (who were formerly intimate partners) it is done through the use of false allegations.  A single 911 phone call to law enforcement and a claim against the target by the stalker can lead to an arrest, loss of liberty, loss of employment, the inability to obtain employment while charges are pending. The assumption is that the target is guilty and while the presumption of innocence should apply in all settings until guilt is appropriately established, in the Stalking By Proxy setting the target's stalking experience is not considered. These circumstances can lead to a trial and in some cases without the help of expert legal counsel. Under these conditions, too many working-class men in our society have been convicted. Stalking By Proxy is by far the most employed method of hunting and punishing a male target for leaving an abusive intimate partner. It is a method of psychological maltreatment. The authority of the agency (usually law enforcement) becomes an extension of the stalker's attacks, abuse, and harassment.  There is, however, a characteristic profile of such persons regardless of race or gender, and that is all persons who utilize Stalking By Proxy are Dangerous personalities. It is reasonable to assume that if the reporting person's past acts and personality meet a troublesome assessment that conditional probability should be considered within the Stalking By Proxy setting.  Law enforcement should not ignore these factors, but they do.

Stalking By Proxy Support Group was established in 2018 by a male stalking target to support other male targets with similar experiences.  The FBI's Law Enforcement Bulletin's article: False Allegations of Adult Crimes, acknowledges that false allegations of crimes are predominately committed by females. It explains how these types of crimes occur, offender typology and goals, and why court officials and law enforcement tend to overlook these crimes.  The problem is law enforcement often refuse to examine clear evidence that point to the accuser as the real offender. In part, the reasons appear to be linked to their injured pride.  But what about their conscience, should pride, position and ego be placed before the dismantling of a target's life?  Rather than discouraging victimization many prosecutors defer to the police to prevent Stalking By Proxy. The police inturn refer to gender as the deciding factor.

This project began as an initiative to serve male stalking targets in the capital district. However, no matter where you are reach out.

|      DO YOU HAVE AN ADVOCACY STRATEGY?       |     STALKING BY PROXY      |       TRIAL DATES      |        CRITICAL RESOURCES       |      CONTACT       |  


How then can law enforcement do a better job at detecting deception and is it possible to do so without endangering the lives of innocent people?  According to the American Psychological Association: "Research has consistently shown that people's ability to detect lies is no more accurate than chance, or flipping a coin. This finding holds across all types of people — students, psychologists, judges, job interviewers and law enforcement personnel (Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2006)."

Former FBI profiler Joe Navarro, M. A.,  and John R. Schafer, M. A., wrote an article titled Detecting Deception which delves deeply into its subject. Another article, Evaluating Truthfulness and Detecting Deception By David Matsumoto, Ph.D.; Hyi Sung Hwang, Ph.D.; Lisa Skinner, J.D.; and Mark Frank, Ph.D. was produced by the FBI's Law Enforcement Bulletin.

The document: Cues to Catching Deception in Interviews: A Brief Overview published on November 2012 by National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism. A Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Center of Excellence Based at the University of Maryland, states “No one verbal cue indicates deception, but the probability of deception increases when clusters of deceptive indicators are present.”  It continues " Moreover, practitioners who learn to watch for these combinations and interactions ofdeception cues have been known to significantly increase their accuracy in detecting deception."

Under the section Non-Verbal Clues it states: [Researchers] Matsumoto et al. identified five behavioral areas that provide cues to deceit: facial expressions, gestures, body language, voice, and verbal style.  The first behavioral area is directly linked with identifying and interpreting microexpressions. Microexpressions (e.g. of fear, anger, joy, etc.) are small indicators of otherwise suppressed emotion which may appear unconsciously on a person’s face for a duration as brief as 1/25th of a second.  A few microexpression examples and their correlating emotions include: 1) false smiles, indicated by a lack of bagged skin under the eyes and/or the absence of crow’s feet wrinkles; 2) anger, indicated by lowered eyebrows; and 3) fear, indicated by raised eyebrows. An “alert observer will be able to detect such a facial expression” unless the observer blinks at the exact moment the microexpression appears. For example, students at the FBI National Academy and the U.S. Coast Guard have been trained to recognize the occurrence of microexpressions at a real-time rate of more than 70% and 80%, respectively."

It continues:  "Other research has looked beyond facial movements to other regions of the body. For example, liars often suppress “nervous” behaviors when lying, partly because the individual may self-consciously try to control movement and partly because lying may create a greater cognitive burden than telling the truth. When one concentrates on a complicated task, other movements frequently cease, particularly motions of the feet, legs, hands, and fingers. Other possible bodily indicators of deception include compressed lips, chin withdrawal, and ventral denial (turning the front of the body away from the speaker), among many other signs of bodily discomfort."

In conclusion, it is the opinion of Stalking By that given the many areas that must be considered when determining a lie a police officer's initial response to a 911 call is not sufficient exposure to make a determination about the guilt or innocence of the person reporting the crime, or the persons accused of the offense.  It is also not sufficient exposure to initiate an arrest without determining the character and possible motive of the person reporting the crime. It is not enough exposure to establish the facts. Cleary, given the prevalence of Stalking By Proxy, law enforcement does not understand how to assess lying. But anyone who uses Stalking By Proxy should be considered a threat to society. Stalking By Proxy is a mendacious, vengeful act by an abusive individual, but it is also a systemic crime for which all branches of law enforcement and the prosecution process and processors are complicit.

Published in Australia, Stalking by Law: Damaging victims and rewarding offenders by Michele Pathe, Rachel MacKenzie, Paul Edward Mullen, examines those areas of the justice system that are particularly susceptible to manipulation by stalkers and the impact of these abuses by the stalking victim. While the content of the article focuses on the Australian legal system, it shares many common challenges of real stalking victims in American society. The authors "present ways in which the problems encountered by stalking victims may be frustrated rather than alleviated by specific aspects of the enforcement of anti-stalking laws and the functioning of certain courts and tribunals. Approaches that prevent or discourage the perpetuation of harassment and damage to victims of stalking with the legal system are discussed."