• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Restraining Order - Toeing the line

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

CdwJava

Senior Member
For clarity, I am seeing this guy on a running trail around a lake. Before escalating the matter I started tracking when when I'd see him.
- He sees my car in the parking lot (there was no way he doesn't see it and he does not park at the lake so I have no way to know if he is there when I arrive) and decides to continue around the lake anyway
- He then passes me at some point around the lake
- Then he is in the same proximity to the exit when I leave (I am in my car and he is on foot always within the same 100 feet)
- Recently, if he sees me early in my run and late in his run he passes going in the opposite direction, then loops around again and passes me at my 4 mile mark. Once he passes me he cuts down a side path and is on the road as I drive away.
Unfortunately, there is no easy way to prove that he recognized your vehicle and knew it to be yours. Plus, such a public place can arguably be considered public and of sufficient size that any proximity can be considered incidental. Now, if he were to make any comments to you, THAT would be a clear violation.

You can call the police to report the violation and see if they will make contact and look into it. Chances are this is the sort of thing they would document and then pass along to the DA for review rather than making an arrest, but, you won't know until you report it.

If he sees me early in his run and late in my run he skips the "meet up" at the 4 mile marker. Once I ducked down on the lower path so he missed me at the mid-way point. When I got back to the parking lot he was there 3o feet from my car looking around as if to say 'where the * did she go?"

Of the 22 weekdays I recently ran (I can vary my time / running location on weekends) I saw him x1 during one run, X2 over nine runs, 3x over four runs. This does not include times he had to have seen my car before running. This seems beyond coincidence - not to mention he has every opportunity to leave the vicinity.
If you are truly afraid for your safety, you might consider a new place to run rather than playing into his "game" and having to constantly look around.

Before I started tracking I spoke with the DA's Victim Advocate - she said "clear violation call the police every time. I spoke with the detective and he said "dicey - the lake isn't on the list but if you don't call the police it didn't happen". So after I started tracking and figured it wasn't my imagination I called the police. The first time the cop said "try running somewhere else", the second time they said try to get the lake on the list and in the meantime they would pass the information on to the detective and then perhaps he would send to the DA. The detective called today and seemed annoyed at me. He said he told me before I had to get the lake added to the list. That isn't what he said exactly but I wasn't going to argue.

Here are my questions:
1. Does anyone know any relevant case law that I can use if I file an additional RO for this location?
2. Does anyone with legal / police experience have insight to whether there is a chance to get this public place added to the list of places he needs to stay away from (if it matters, I have been going to this lake for more than 20 years. He has only been going there two years)?
3. Can I use details, information from prior to the first RO for this RO?
The link provided earlier should help you in attempting to get the TRO modified to include the lake where you run. However, in my experience, public places like parks and such, are tough to get a judge to list as a prohibited place. You can ask, but it may be a coin toss whether the judge will seriously consider it. A lot may depend on the size and status of the lake and the running path.

And, as you have done, report any contact to the police.
 


LdiJ

Senior Member
I see your point however, I did start going somewhere else and he followed me there. That area is more remote. The lake is well populated and no car traffic which is important since I run after work. I have few options given my schedule and the fact I don't like street running during commute time when people are driving stupid. The only places on the RO are my car (which he is near at the lake) my work and my house.

And, yes I am stubborn. Why should my world become smaller because of his behavior?
Its really not a question of making your world smaller, at least not on a long term basis. Its more a question of being strategic in order to get him sufficiently cowed to understand that he MUST stop or it will have a seriously negative effect on HIS life.

The reality of things is that most people with a seriously stalker end up having to move away and disappear in order to truly get rid of the stalker...or the stalker has to transfer their fixation to someone else...or the stalker has to go to jail for long enough to lose the fixation.
 

quincy

Senior Member
Its really not a question of making your world smaller, at least not on a long term basis. Its more a question of being strategic in order to get him sufficiently cowed to understand that he MUST stop or it will have a seriously negative effect on HIS life.

The reality of things is that most people with a seriously stalker end up having to move away and disappear in order to truly get rid of the stalker...or the stalker has to transfer their fixation to someone else...or the stalker has to go to jail for long enough to lose the fixation.
Actually, it is one in seven, according to the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. That is a significant number who feel the need to move but it cannot be called "most."

I agree with your first paragraph.
 
Last edited:

LdiJ

Senior Member
Actually, it is one in seven, according to the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. That is a significant number who feel the need to move but it cannot be called "most."
Interesting...how many of the other 6 of 7 are in big cities and move locally?
 

quincy

Senior Member
Interesting...how many of the other 6 of 7 are in big cities and move locally?
I don't know offhand.

Following is a link to the report on the study by the BJS and the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW). You can access additional data through the University of Michigan's National Archive of Criminal Justice Data.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svus_rev.pdf

And here is a link to a follow up study by the CDC:

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6308a1.htm?s_cid=ss6308a1_w
 
Last edited:

Cranford

Junior Member
Unfortunately, there is no easy way to prove that he recognized your vehicle and knew it to be yours. Plus, such a public place can arguably be considered public and of sufficient size that any proximity can be considered incidental. Now, if he were to make any comments to you, THAT would be a clear violation.

You can call the police to report the violation and see if they will make contact and look into it. Chances are this is the sort of thing they would document and then pass along to the DA for review rather than making an arrest, but, you won't know until you report it.


If you are truly afraid for your safety, you might consider a new place to run rather than playing into his "game" and having to constantly look around.


The link provided earlier should help you in attempting to get the TRO modified to include the lake where you run. However, in my experience, public places like parks and such, are tough to get a judge to list as a prohibited place. You can ask, but it may be a coin toss whether the judge will seriously consider it. A lot may depend on the size and status of the lake and the running path.

And, as you have done, report any contact to the police.

Thanks for the insight. I spoke with the advocate and she advised to try to amend the order to include the lake so I will get my ducks in a row and try. I guess my issue is that he clearly does see me at the halfway mark and then comes around for another lap knowing that we will again pass within the 100 yard no fly zone. Like I said, he admitted in emails his behavior was stalking and this current behavior is no different than what he was doing before.
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
Thanks for the insight. I spoke with the advocate and she advised to try to amend the order to include the lake so I will get my ducks in a row and try. I guess my issue is that he clearly does see me at the halfway mark and then comes around for another lap knowing that we will again pass within the 100 yard no fly zone. Like I said, he admitted in emails his behavior was stalking and this current behavior is no different than what he was doing before.
But, given that it is a large public place, proving to a court's satisfaction that the passing is pre-meditated and intentional can be difficult. You should still report it, but, the cleanest route to take would be to add the lake to the listing of prohibited places. Though, as I said, it may be difficult to convince a court to place a public place on such a list unless it was a place of employment. Since such a prohibition would be a serious infringement upon his access to a place open to the general public and utilized by you for a short amount of time each day/week/month, do not be surprised if a court might not sign off on it. I have never seen a court list such a public place absent some other compelling reason, but that doesn't mean it can't happen, only that I am not aware of it.
 

Shadowbunny

Queen of the Not-Rights
Carl, would it be way-over-the-top for a judge to put time limits on a location? So let's say cranford runs at the lake every morning -- would a judge be able to say "Mr. Stalker, you can be at the lake between the hours of 1200 - 2200, but not 0500-1200"? Or is that an over-reach?
 

Cranford

Junior Member
Carl, would it be way-over-the-top for a judge to put time limits on a location? So let's say cranford runs at the lake every morning -- would a judge be able to say "Mr. Stalker, you can be at the lake between the hours of 1200 - 2200, but not 0500-1200"? Or is that an over-reach?
I would be fine with that - I am absolutely NOT a morning runner (perhaps I could manage a slow shuffle with a cup of coffee in my PJs). Looking back at my documentation it is weekday evenings at are the issue.
 

Cranford

Junior Member
Update - Arrested

Location: California


Got an RO in July against an acquaintance who was infatuated with me. He started getting very clingy and stalkerish. Always turning up at a public place I frequent - pretending it was a coincidence. Repeatedly told him I was uncomfortable. Found out he was married with two kids. Had also lied about some other big things. He comes across as very socially awkward. After I told him in no uncertain terms to back off and cut off contact he would just be there on the street near my house (nowhere near his house or work) at the time he knew I was going to and from work. I'd also see him in his car on my way out of work several times a week and around my car every time I was at the place mentioned above. It was FAR too coincidental. Then I found a tracker on my car. I also suspect he was in my house. Can't prove it was him but he is the only one who kept showing up. Have tons of emails of email where he admits his behavior was "pestering" and "sneaky". In the end, he stipulated to the order so I wasn't able to provide that documentation to the court.

I still see him at the public place mentioned above. I began noticing that if I'd see him in one area, he is always right on the street as I am leaving (20 - 60 minutes later). The timing to enable him to HAPPEN to be there is not possible without a huge effort on his part. In other words, it is not a coincidence - he is lying in wait. In a correspondence pre RO when I was telling him to back off, he said "I am afraid if you don't see me, you are going to forget about me". He is deliberately making sure I "see" him.

So technically he is not violating the RO but I find this creepy and unnerving. After 4 months of this I have started tracking when this happens (currently it is happening almost every time I am at this place - 3x a week).

I called the Victims Advocate with the DA. She said this was a clear violation and to call the police every time. Really don't want to call the police for a non emergency when the guy will be long gone by the time they get there.

I called the detective on the original case. He say since the location where this is happening isn't listed on the RO he isn't in violation. Further, my Excel spread sheet noting the times / events will do me no good because it is the creepy guy's word against mine.

This guy is continuing the stalking-ike behavior that got him the RO and there doesn't seem to be anything I can do. Not sure who is right, the Victims Advocate or the detective or what I can do. I am continuing to document and to try to get photos as well.
Three cop cars, 5 officers. He has been arrested and charged with stalking. Apparently my color coded spreadsheet was the talk of the shift briefing :D
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
Carl, would it be way-over-the-top for a judge to put time limits on a location? So let's say cranford runs at the lake every morning -- would a judge be able to say "Mr. Stalker, you can be at the lake between the hours of 1200 - 2200, but not 0500-1200"? Or is that an over-reach?
I have personally never seen a location time frame limit on a TRO/CHO/CPO, but I suppose it's possible. I would think they would not prefer to do that because such time frames can still result in claims and counterclaims.
 
Last edited:

CdwJava

Senior Member
Three cop cars, 5 officers. He has been arrested and charged with stalking. Apparently my color coded spreadsheet was the talk of the shift briefing :D
Outstanding! The frequency of the contacts and the detailed recording can be very effective. Now, they have to make the case to a jury. Typically, these cases plea (as most do), but, with any luck, he'll go away for a while. I've been the primary on cases much like yours where the suspects were arrested and prosecuted, but the juries had a tough time turning the corner when the primary violations occurred in public places. I would encourage you to keep in touch with the investigator, the DA, a victim advocate (perhaps through your local Victim-witness advocate) and also request notification should he be released from custody. Some counties subscribe to Vinelink (https://vinlink.com) where you can receive notification of changes of status and release.

Good luck!
 

Cranford

Junior Member
Outstanding! The frequency of the contacts and the detailed recording can be very effective. Now, they have to make the case to a jury. Typically, these cases plea (as most do), but, with any luck, he'll go away for a while. I've been the primary on cases much like yours where the suspects were arrested and prosecuted, but the juries had a tough time turning the corner when the primary violations occurred in public places. I would encourage you to keep in touch with the investigator, the DA, a victim advocate (perhaps through your local Victim-witness advocate) and also request notification should he be released from custody. Some counties subscribe to Vinelink (https://vinlink.com) where you can receive notification of changes of status and release.

Good luck!
They charged him with Felony Stalking (because of the RO was in place - bail $100,000). There was also a misdemeanor charge of Contempt of Court. I took contemporaneous notes (the spreadsheet) and have pictures as well as my narrative with dates / events that I never got to use in obtaining the RO...not to mention emails where he called out this similar behavior as stalking. Oh and I also have pictures of when he followed me to another location. I figured there would be a plea. He doesn't like confrontation and to have all his emails and behavior aired...

Unfortunately I am very familiar with Vine (awesome service) and I was notified that he was released about 30 minutes ago.

Really appreciate all the help and advice I have received here!
 

Shadowbunny

Queen of the Not-Rights
They charged him with Felony Stalking (because of the RO was in place - bail $100,000). There was also a misdemeanor charge of Contempt of Court. I took contemporaneous notes (the spreadsheet) and have pictures as well as my narrative with dates / events that I never got to use in obtaining the RO...not to mention emails where he called out this similar behavior as stalking. Oh and I also have pictures of when he followed me to another location. I figured there would be a plea. He doesn't like confrontation and to have all his emails and behavior aired...

Unfortunately I am very familiar with Vine (awesome service) and I was notified that he was released about 30 minutes ago.

Really appreciate all the help and advice I have received here!
That's a good update. And I'll be praying for your safety; the fact that he was released skeeves me out a bit.....
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
That's a good update. And I'll be praying for your safety; the fact that he was released skeeves me out a bit.....
Probably made bail. he good news is that the TRO should still be in place, and the court may have placed additional requirements as well.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top