Problem-Specific Guides Series

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

No. 22

Stalking

by the National Center 

for Victims of Crime

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

Problem-Specific Guides Series

No. 22

Stalking

National Center for Victims of Crime

This project was supported by cooperative agreement #2002-CKWX-0003 by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office). The opinions contained 

herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the 

official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific 

agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an 

endorsement of the product by the author(s) or the U.S. Department 

of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement 

discussion of the issues.

The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of the 

original date of this publication. Given that URLs and websites are in 

constant flux, neither the author(s) nor the COPS Office can vouch for 

their current validity.

©2012 Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, Inc. The U.S. Department 

of Justice reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to 

reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and authorize others to use, this 

publication for Federal Government purposes. This publication may be 

freely distributed and used for noncommercial and educational purposes.

www.cops.usdoj.gov

ISBN: 1-932582-30-4

First published January 2004. Updated July 2012.

Contents

Contents

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

The Problem of Stalking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Defining Stalking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Prevalence and Nature of Stalking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

State and Federal Anti-Stalking Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Related Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Factors Contributing to Stalking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Stalking Behaviors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Types of Stalkers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Stalking’s Impact on Victims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

The Challenges of Policing Stalking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Understanding Your Local Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Asking the Right Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Incidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Victims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Offenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Locations/Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Current Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Measuring Your Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Responses to the Problem of Stalking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Appendix: Summary of Responses to Stalking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

| 1 |

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series

The Problem-Specific Guides summarize knowledge about how police can reduce the 

harm caused by specific crime and disorder problems. They are guides to prevention and 

to improving the overall response to incidents, not to investigating offenses or handling 

specific incidents. Neither do they cover all of the technical details about how to implement 

specific responses. The guides are written for police—of whatever rank or assignment—

who must address the specific problem the guides cover. The guides will be most useful to 

officers who:

•	 Understand basic problem-oriented policing principles and methods. The 

guides are not primers in problem-oriented policing. They deal only briefly with the 

initial decision to focus on a particular problem, methods to analyze the problem, 

and means to assess the results of a problem-oriented policing project. They are 

designed to help police decide how best to analyze and address a problem they 

have already identified. (A companion series of Problem-Solving Tools guides has 

been produced to aid in various aspects of problem analysis and assessment.)

•	 Can look at a problem in depth. Depending on the complexity of the problem, 

you should be prepared to spend perhaps weeks, or even months, analyzing and 

responding to it. Carefully studying a problem before responding helps you 

design the right strategy, one that is most likely to work in your community. 

You should not blindly adopt the responses others have used; you must decide 

whether they are appropriate to your local situation. What is true in one place 

may not be true elsewhere; what works in one place may not work everywhere.

•	 Are willing to consider new ways of doing police business. The guides describe 

responses that other police departments have used or that researchers have tested. 

While not all of these responses will be appropriate to your particular problem, they 

should help give a broader view of the kinds of things you could do. You may think 

you cannot implement some of these responses in your jurisdiction, but perhaps you 

can. In many places, when police have discovered a more effective response, they 

have succeeded in having laws and policies changed, improving the response to the 

problem. (A companion series of Response Guides has been produced to help you 

understand how commonly-used police responses work on a variety of problems.) 
| 2 |

Stalking

•	 Understand the value and the limits of research knowledge. For some types 

of problems, a lot of useful research is available to the police; for other problems, 

little is available. Accordingly, some guides in this series summarize existing research 

whereas other guides illustrate the need for more research on that particular problem. 

Regardless, research has not provided definitive answers to all the questions you 

might have about the problem. The research may help get you started in designing 

your own responses, but it cannot tell you exactly what to do. This will depend 

greatly on the particular nature of your local problem. In the interest of keeping the 

guides readable, not every piece of relevant research has been cited, nor has every 

point been attributed to its sources. To have done so would have overwhelmed and 

distracted the reader. The references listed at the end of each guide are those drawn 

on most heavily; they are not a complete bibliography of research on the subject. 

•	 Are willing to work with others to find effective solutions to the problem. The 

police alone cannot implement many of the responses discussed in the guides. They 

must frequently implement them in partnership with other responsible private and 

public bodies, including other government agencies, non-governmental organizations, 

private businesses, public utilities, community groups, and individual citizens. An 

effective problem-solver must know how to forge genuine partnerships with others 

and be prepared to invest considerable effort in making these partnerships work. 

Each guide identifies particular individuals or groups in the community with whom 

police might work to improve the overall response to that problem. Thorough 

analysis of problems often reveals that individuals and groups other than the police 

are in a stronger position to address problems and that police ought to shift some 

greater responsibility to them to do so. Response Guide No. 3, Shifting and Sharing 

Responsibility for Public Safety Problems, provides further discussion of this topic.

The COPS Office defines community policing as “a philosophy that promotes 

organizational strategies, which support the systematic use of partnerships and problemsolving techniques, to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public 

safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime.” These guides emphasize 

problem-solving and police-community partnerships in the context of addressing specific 

public safety problems. For the most part, the organizational strategies that can facilitate 

problem–solving and police–community partnerships vary considerably and discussion of 

them is beyond the scope of these guides. 
| 3 |

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series

These guides have drawn on research findings and police practices in the United States, 

the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Scandinavia. 

Even though laws, customs, and police practices vary from country to country, it is apparent 

that the police everywhere experience common problems. In a world that is becoming 

increasingly interconnected, it is important that police be aware of research and successful 

practices beyond the borders of their own countries.

Each guide is informed by a thorough review of the research literature and reported police 

practice, and each guide is anonymously peer-reviewed by a line police officer, a police 

executive, and a researcher prior to publication. The review process is independently 

managed by the COPS Office, which solicits the reviews. 

For more information about problem-oriented policing, visit the Center for ProblemOriented Policing online at www.popcenter.org. This website offers free online access to:

•	 The Problem-Specific Guides series

•	 The companion Response Guides and Problem-Solving Tools series 

•	 Special publications on crime analysis and on policing terrorism

•	 Instructional information about problem-oriented policing and related topics 

•	 An interactive problem-oriented policing training exercise

•	 An interactive Problem Analysis Module

•	 Online access to important police research and practices

•	 Information about problem-oriented policing conferences and award programs 
| 4 |

Stalking

Acknowledgments

The Problem-Oriented Guides for Police are very much a collaborative effort. While 

each guide has a primary author, other project team members, COPS Office staff, and 

anonymous peer reviewers contributed to each guide by proposing text, recommending 

research, and offering suggestions on matters of format and style. 

The principal project team developing the guide series comprised Herman Goldstein, 

Professor Emeritus, University of Wisconsin Law School; Ronald V. Clarke, Professor of 

Criminal Justice, Rutgers University; John E. Eck, Associate Professor of Criminal Justice, 

University of Cincinnati; Michael S. Scott, Assistant Clinical Professor, University of 

Wisconsin Law School; Rana Sampson, Police Consultant, San Diego; and Deborah Lamm 

Weisel, Director of Police Research, North Carolina State University.

Karin Schmerler, Rita Varano and Nancy Leach oversaw the project for the COPS Office. 

Suzanne Fregly edited the guides. Research for the guides was conducted at the Criminal 

Justice Library at Rutgers University under the direction of Phyllis Schultze. 

The project team also wishes to acknowledge the members of the San Diego, National City, 

and Savannah police departments who provided feedback on the guides’ format and style 

in the early stages of the project, as well as the line police officers, police executives, and 

researchers who peer reviewed each guide.

The National Center for Victims of Crime wishes to acknowledge the many people who 

worked with us to create effective community-oriented policing stalking protocol. The 

center was funded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, to develop a model stalking protocol and work with the Philadelphia 

Police Department to field test it. This guide was based on that work, information about 

which can be found at www.ncvc.org/src.
| 5 |

The Problem of Stalking

The Problem of Stalking

This guide reviews the problem of stalking and the factors that contribute to it. It then 

identifies a series of questions to help you analyze your local problem. Finally, it reviews 

responses to the problem, and what is known about them from evaluative research and 

police practice.

Defining Stalking

Stalking creates uncertainty, instills fear, and can completely disrupt lives. It can involve 

severe–even lethal–violence. Stalking involves a pattern of overtly criminal and/or 

apparently innocent behavior that makes victims fear for themselves or others. 

Stalking is distinguishable from many other types of crime in two important ways. First, 

it entails repeat victimization of a person the offender targets–it is, by its very nature, a 

series of acts, rather than a single incident. Second, it is partly defined by its impact on the 

victim. While legal definitions of stalking vary from state to state, the following is a useful 

general definition:

A course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable 

person fear.1

Prevalence and Nature of Stalking

Stalking is widespread. Nearly one in 12 women and one in 45 men are stalked at least 

once in their lifetime.2 It is estimated that more than a million women and nearly half a 

million men are stalked in the United States each year.3 The overwhelming majority (78 

percent) of victims are women, and the majority of offenders (87 percent) are men.4

Most victims know their stalkers. Even though we often hear reports of fans stalking 

celebrities, survey evidence indicates that fewer than a quarter of female victims and a 

third of male victims are stalked by strangers.5 Nearly 60 percent of female victims and 30 

percent of male victims are stalked by current or former intimate partners.6 In intimatepartner cases, fewer than half of stalking incidents occur after the relationship ends.7

Most of the time, the stalking occurs during the relationship.8, †

† In cases involving intimate partners, 21 percent of victims surveyed reported that stalking occurred during the relationship, 

36 percent reported that it occurred both during and after the relationship, and 43 percent reported that it started after the 

relationship
| 6 |

Stalking

Stalking and domestic violence intersect in a variety of ways. Research indicates that 81 

percent of women stalked by an intimate have been physically assaulted by that person.9

Thirty-one percent of women stalked by an intimate have been sexually assaulted by that 

person.10 Offenders who stalk former intimate partners are more likely to have physically or 

sexually assaulted them before the relationship ended.11

Stalking is often a feature of relationships involving domestic violence.12 Like domestic 

violence, it is a crime of power and control. In one study about stalking and prestalking relationships, over 50 percent of the women were psychologically abused, 65 

percent reported physical abuse, and 8.6 percent experienced sexual abuse during their 

relationship.13 If stalking is defined as a course of conduct that intimidates or frightens the 

victim, then relationships involving domestic violence also involve stalking. 

Both domestic violence and stalking are linked to lethal violence. Research has revealed that 

one-third of women killed each year in the United States die at the hands of a current or 

former intimate.14 It is estimated that 25 to 35 percent of stalking cases involve violence.15

And when stalking leads to violence, it is often a precursor to lethal violence. Studies show 

that stalking precedes an exceedingly high proportion of homicides by intimates.16 In 

over 75 percent of completed and attempted female homicides by intimates, the offenders 

stalked the victims in the year before the offense.17

Victims report only about half of stalking incidents to the police.18 Generally, those who do 

not report do not think the matter is criminal, do not think the police can help them, or 

fear that reporting will make the stalker even more dangerous.19 Twenty percent of victims 

who reported stalking stated that the police did not act regarding their complaints.20 Other 

victims may not report incidents because they may minimize the risk a stalker poses or 

blame themselves for the stalker’s behavior.
| 7 |

The Problem of Stalking

State and Federal Anti-Stalking Laws

The first stalking law was passed in California in 1990. Since then, increasing awareness 

about stalking’s impact has led legislatures in all 50 states to pass stalking laws.† While 

legislation is critical, laws alone accomplish little without clear anti-stalking policies and 

effective enforcement. Yet most police agencies across the country have not adopted distinct 

stalking-intervention protocols and procedures.

† You can find state stalking statutes on the National Center for Victims of Crime’s Stalking Resource Center website, 

www.ncvc.org/s

Stalking laws vary from state to state, but they share certain basic elements. Statutes 

generally define stalking in terms of a course of conduct or pattern of behavior that would 

cause a reasonable person to fear bodily injury or death for himself/herself or a member 

of his/her immediate family. Similarly, under most state laws, two or more incidents are 

required to establish a course of conduct. Because state laws vary, you should consult with 

your local prosecutor regarding your state’s stalking law to be clear about what evidence is 

necessary to build a stalking case. In addition to specific stalking statutes, numerous other 

state and local laws relating to a wide variety of crimes and the investigation or prevention 

of crime may be relevant in stalking cases. These include laws governing:

•	 Protective/restraining orders

•	 Threats, assaults, and attempted murder 

•	 Kidnapping

•	 Vandalism and other property crimes

•	 Theft

•	 Domestic violence

•	 Sexual assault

•	 Hate crimes

•	 Terrorism or terrorist threats

•	 Annoying phone calls and other forms of harassment

•	 Identity theft

•	 Utility theft

•	 Wiretapping
| 8 |

Stalking

Federal statutes specifically relating to or applicable to stalking may provide further options 

for prosecuting stalkers.†

† Relevant federal laws include Full Faith and Credit (U.S.C.§ 2265), Interstate Stalking (U.S.C.§ 2261), Interstate Dom

Violence (U.S.C.§ 2261), Interstate Violation of a Protection Order (U.S.C.§ 2262), Federal Domestic Violence Firearm Prohibi

(U.S.C.§ 922), Interstate Communications (U.S.C.§ 875), and Harassing Telephone Calls in Interstate Communications 

233(a)(1)(C)]

Related Problems

Other related problems and issues not directly addressed by this guide include:

•	 Homicide

•	 Domestic violence

•	 Sexual assault

•	 Violations of protective orders

•	 Vandalism

•	 Telephone misuse

•	 Trespassing

•	 Cyberstalking

•	 Harassment

•	 Cruelty to pets or other animals 

•	 Voyeurism

•	 Identity theft

•	 Workplace violence

•	 Dignitary and celebrity protection

Factors Contributing to Stalking

Understanding the factors that contribute to stalking will help you frame your own local 

analysis questions, determine good effectiveness measures, recognize key intervention points, 

and select appropriate responses.
| 9 |

The Problem of Stalking

Stalking Behaviors

Stalking, by definition, is not a one-time act but a course of conduct. It may involve a mix 

of patently criminal acts and acts that, in isolation, would seem nonthreatening. It is the 

pattern and context of these criminal and noncriminal acts that constitute stalking.

Stalking often includes:

•	 Assaulting the victim

•	 Violating protective orders†

† Sixty-nine percent of female and 81 percent of male victims with protective orders reported that their stalkers had violated 

the order (Tjaden and Thoennes 1998)

• Sexually assaulting the victim

•	 Vandalizing the victim’s property

•	 Burglarizing the victim’s home or otherwise stealing from the victim

•	 Threatening the victim

•	 Killing the victim’s pet(s)

Other common stalking behaviors include:

•	 Sending the victim cards or gifts

•	 Leaving telephone or e-mail messages for the victim

•	 Disclosing to the victim personal information the offender has uncovered about him 

or her

•	 Disseminating personal information about the victim to others

•	 Following the victim

•	 Visiting the victim at work

•	 Waiting outside the victim’s home 

•	 Sending the victim photographs taken of him or her without consent

•	 Monitoring the victim’s internet history and computer usage

•	 Using technology to gather images of or information about the victim
| 10 |

Stalking

Types of Stalkers

While stalkers come from different backgrounds and have different personalities, researchers 

have developed several widely accepted typologies of them. It is important to emphasize 

that, while stalker typologies can be helpful, they are only general classifications. Whenever 

possible, a properly trained professional should conduct a threat assessment. Individual 

stalkers may not precisely fit any single category, and often exhibit characteristics associated 

with more than one category. However, the typology can alert investigators and victim 

advocates to certain general characteristics exhibited by similar stalkers, and help them with 

threat assessment and safety planning. 

One widely accepted typology of stalkers21 is based on the stalker’s underlying motives, and 

includes the following categories:

Simple obsessional. This is the most common type. The stalker is usually a male, and 

the victim an ex-spouse, ex-lover, or former boss. The stalking sometimes results from the 

stalker’s feeling the victim has mistreated him or her. In intimate relationships, the stalking 

frequently begins before a breakup.

Love obsessional. The stalker is a stranger or casual acquaintance to the victim, but 

is obsessed and begins a campaign of harassment to make the victim aware of his or 

her existence. This type often stalks a celebrity or public figure, but can also stalk a 

noncelebrity.

Erotomania. The stalker falsely believes that the victim is in love with him or her, and 

that, but for some external obstacle or interference, they would be together. The victim 

may be rich or famous, or in a position of power (e.g., a movie star, employer, or political 

figure). In this situation, the stalker could also pose a great risk to those close to the victim 

(e.g., a spouse or lover perceived to be “in the way”). 

False victimization syndrome. This is extremely rare and involves someone who 

consciously or subconsciously wants to play the role of victim. He or she may make up 

a complex tale, claiming to be a stalking victim. In such cases, the would-be victim is 

sometimes the actual stalker, and the alleged offender is the real victim. 
| 11 |

The Problem of Stalking

Another typology used to classify stalkers identifies them by their relationship to 

the victim.22 This typology divides stalkers into two basic categories: intimate and 

nonintimate.† The following is a brief description of these categories:

Intimate. A former relationship exists between the stalker and the victim. There is likely 

a history of abuse, such as domestic violence, by the stalker. The stalker often seeks to 

reestablish a relationship the victim has tried to end.

Nonintimate. The stalker has no interpersonal relationship with the victim. He or she 

may choose the victim after a brief encounter, or simply after observing the victim. The 

victim is often unable to identify the stalker when he or she first becomes aware of being 

stalked. This type is subdivided into two categories:

•	 Organized. The relationship between the stalker and the victim is characterized by 

one-way, anonymous communication from stalker to victim. The stalker is methodical 

and calculating, and the victim usually does not know the stalker’s identity.

•	 Delusional. The relationship between the stalker and the victim is based solely 

on the stalker’s psychological fixation on the victim. The stalker is delusional and 

falsely believes he or she has a relationship or other connection with the victim.

Again, stalkers often exhibit behaviors from more than one typology. The typologies are an 

overview, and you should never use them as a substitute for a thorough threat assessment. 

Stalkers are, by their very nature, obsessive and dangerous.23 Regardless of typology, 

you should always consider stalkers capable of killing their victims. Anyone the stalker 

perceives as impeding his or her contact with the victim, including police, prosecutors, 

and advocates, is also at risk. Some stalkers seek union with their victims through 

murder-suicide.24 Any suicidal statements or gestures the stalker makes should serve as 

an indication that the stalker is a high-risk threat. You should also examine the stalker’s 

background for depression, psychiatric hospitalizations, and other indications that he or she 

may be suicidal. 

† The typology terms actually used are “domestic” and “nondomestic.” “Intimate” and “nonintimate” are used here for clarit
| 12 |

Stalking

Stalking’s Impact on Victims

Unlike the case with many crimes, the legal definition of stalking covers not only the 

offender’s behavior but also the effects on the victim. The victim’s psychological responses 

and the changes the victim makes in his or her life as a result of stalking can all be used as 

evidence of the fear the offender has caused. 

Stalking’s impact is often wide-ranging, severe, and psychologically traumatic. Many 

victims feel constantly on alert, vulnerable, out of control, stressed, and anxious. Dealing 

with stalking can consume all their energy. They may experience a loss of trust, long-term 

emotional distress, and significant disruption of everyday living.25 Many seek psychological 

counseling.26 Victims’ symptoms tend to worsen with each new incident, and may be 

compounded by concerns about the effects on their children and other secondary victims.27

Stalking can also trigger a wide variety of behavioral reactions. Many victims take steps 

to avoid being followed and spied on. They alter their normal routines, avoid going out 

alone, and give up leisure activities. To protect themselves, they may screen all telephone 

calls (at home and work) and change their telephone number, email and postal addresses, 

driver’s license, and social security number.28, † More drastic action may include temporary 

or permanent relocation. They may move to another state or try to change their identity, 

often uprooting children in the process, leaving behind close friends and relatives, and 

abandoning careers. 

When the criminal justice system fails to protect victims from stalking, it makes it that 

much harder for them to recover from its effects.29

† While victims can change their social security number, some victims have had problems as a result (for example, establishing 

credit or prior employment history, or getting a passport). Therefore, this option should be weighed carefull
| 13 |

The Problem of Stalking

The Challenges of Policing Stalking

Stalking can be difficult to recognize, investigate, assess, and prevent for many reasons, 

including the following:

•	 Stalking is not a single, obvious, easily identifiable crime like assault, robbery, burglary, 

and most other offenses.

•	 Stalking, like domestic violence, often is not taken sufficiently seriously because it 

can involve acts the police may perceive as part of everyday courtship and intimate 

relationships. The police may mistake repeated telephone calls, letters, cards, and gifts 

from “would be” lovers for innocent romantic attention. However, when such gestures 

are part of a course of conduct that instills fear in the victim, they are being used to 

terrorize. 

•	 Stalking behaviors are complex, varied, and unpredictable. Stalking takes many forms, 

and individual incidents may be very different. It is hard to be certain if and when 

stalking will escalate to violence. 

•	 There is no single stalker profile to assist investigators. 

•	 When blatant acts of violence occur, a pattern of stalking behavior may not seem 

significant.

•	 Effective investigations depend on gathering information from many sources. 

•	 The stalker may commit crimes in different locations and be under investigation in 

multiple jurisdictions. The victim may live in one jurisdiction, work or attend school in 

another, and seek refuge in yet another. If the stalker threatens people connected with 

the victim, such as coworkers, family members, or friends, or vandalizes their property, 

different victims’ names will appear on complaint reports.
| 14 |

Stalking

•	 Stalkers are not easily deterred and tend to be obsessive. Therefore, conventional 

sanctions, including court orders forbidding contact with victims, may not necessarily 

make an impact. Many stalkers continue to harass their victims even after conviction; 

the stalking may escalate if they perceive court sanctions as minor. Others may see their 

trials as a way to stay in their victims’ lives. Because the first prosecution and conviction 

may not end the stalking, more enforcement is often necessary.† Thus, it is important 

to keep in touch with victims and ensure that offenders are supervised. (Mental 

health agencies may have a duty to warn victims of imminent threats, and batterer’s 

intervention programs often do not require confidentiality between offenders and staff; 

both can help monitor offenders.)

Because stalking is an ongoing crime involving multiple incidents, police may have 

numerous opportunities to observe the stalker’s behavior and make an arrest. Even in cases 

where the stalker does not contact the victim in person, police can generally piece together 

enough evidence to identify and locate the offender and make an arrest. The sooner police 

can document separate stalking incidents, the greater the chance of bringing the offender to 

justice before a case escalates to lethal levels.

† Investigators throughout the country have indicated that stalking cases can last years beyond the first conviction. It is not

unusual for an offender to start stalking again before an anniversary, following a stressful event, or after any number of other 

triggers that renew the stalker’s interest in the victim
| 15 |

Understanding Your Local Problem

Understanding Your Local Problem

The information provided above is only a generalized description of stalking. You must 

combine the basic facts with a more specific understanding of your local problem. Analyzing 

the local problem carefully will help you design a more effective response strategy. 

Asking the Right Questions

The following are some critical questions you should ask when analyzing your stalking 

problem. Your answers to these questions will help you choose the most appropriate set of 

responses later on.

Incidents

•	 How many stalking incidents does your agency investigate within a year? 

•	 When your agency identifies stalking, does it record it? If so, does it record it 

specifically as stalking, or as the particular offense committed during each incident?

•	 What percentage of stalking cases involve other offenses (e.g., homicide, domestic 

violence, threats, harassing phone calls, child abuse, pet abuse, theft, vandalism)? 

Conversely, what percentage of those offenses involve stalking? For example, what 

percentage of domestic violence incidents are part of a stalking pattern?

•	 Does your agency have data systems for tracking repeat offenses (by offender, victim, 

and location)?

•	 To what extent are stalkers using advanced technology such as global positioning 

systems, wireless remote cameras, and invasive computer programs to stalk victims?

Victims

•	 How many stalking victims are there in your jurisdiction? (Consider conducting a local 

victimization survey, rather than relying on police reports.)

•	 What percentage of stalking victims report it to the police?

•	 What physical injuries do victims suffer? What psychological harm? What other harms 

(e.g., missed work or school, job loss, moving expenses)?

•	 Do particular populations in your community appear to be targeted for stalking?
| 16 |

Stalking

Offenders

•	 What percentage of stalkers have stalked more than one victim?

•	 What is the relationship between stalkers and victims? What percentage of stalkers are 

strangers to their victims? Acquaintances? Former lovers or spouses?

•	 Have stalkers had multiple contacts with the criminal justice system? Have they been 

convicted of stalking before? 

•	 Do stalkers routinely violate protective orders? Bail conditions?

•	 Are stalkers monitored while cases are pending?

•	 Do stalkers contact victims while cases are pending?

•	 Do stalkers access information about victims once a case has been initiated, such as 

where they live or work?

•	 Are stalkers held accountable when they violate bond or probation conditions?

Locations/Times

•	 Do stalking incidents occur at particular locations, such as victims’ workplaces or homes?

•	 Do stalking incidents occur at certain times of the day, days of the week, or times of 

the year (e.g., when children are not home, in the middle of the night, on weekends, 

around holidays or other special days)? 

Current Responses

•	 How does your agency currently respond to stalking? How is the problem addressed by 

patrol officers? Investigators? Victim advocates?

•	 Does your agency have a written policy or protocol for responding to stalking or 

potential stalking incidents?

•	 What training do officers receive on stalking?

•	 How do other agencies (prosecutor’s offices, courts, victims’ assistance organizations) 

handle stalking cases? 

•	 What services are provided to stalking victims? How are victims made aware of those 

services?

•	 Do you currently have formal cooperative agreements with other law enforcement 

agencies at the local, state, and federal levels in stalking cases?

•	 Does your agency routinely work with community social service agencies on 

stalking cases?
| 17 |

Understanding Your Local Problem

•	 Has your community developed a multidisciplinary response to stalking?

•	 What systems are in place to monitor convicted stalkers? Are they effective?

•	 Does your agency routinely check for ways that offenders can contact or access 

information about victims while they are incarcerated or when their cases are pending?

•	 Do you believe the laws in your jurisdiction provide adequate legal authority to address 

stalking?

•	 What percentage of stalking charges result in conviction?

•	 What types of sentences do stalkers receive when convicted? To what extent do they 

comply with sentence terms?

Measuring Your Effectiveness

Measurement allows you to determine to what degree your efforts have succeeded, and 

suggests how you might modify your responses if they are not producing the intended 

results. You should take measures of your problem before you implement responses, to 

determine how serious the problem is, and after you implement them, to determine 

whether they have been effective. (For more detailed guidance on measuring effectiveness, 

see the companion guide to this series, Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide 

for Police Problem-Solvers.) 

The following are potentially useful measures of the effectiveness of responses to stalking: 

•	 Increased number of stalking complaints (this may indicate that victims are more 

willing to report it)

•	 Shorter time between the first and last stalking incidents

•	 Reduced harm suffered by victims

•	 Increased number of stalking cases in which charges are filed

•	 Increased conviction rate

•	 Increased number of arrests for violations of protective orders

•	 Increased victim satisfaction with police handling of their cases

•	 Increased victim perception of safety

| 19 |

Responses to the Problem of Stalking

Responses to the Problem of Stalking

Your analysis of your local problem should give you a better understanding of the factors 

contributing to it. Once you have analyzed your local problem and established a baseline 

for measuring effectiveness, you should consider possible strategies to address the problem.

The following response strategies provide a foundation of ideas for addressing your 

particular problem. These strategies are drawn from a variety of sources, including research 

studies, police surveys, and police reports. Several of these strategies may apply to your 

community’s problem. It is critical that you tailor responses to local circumstances, and 

that you can justify each response based on reliable analysis. You should handle each case 

individually, based on the particular circumstances. A thorough threat assessment can be 

invaluable in formulating an appropriate response. In most cases, an effective strategy will 

involve implementing several different responses. Law enforcement responses alone are 

seldom effective in reducing or solving the problem. Do not limit yourself to considering 

what police can do: give careful consideration to who else in your community shares 

responsibility for the problem and can help police better respond to it.

1. Identifying stalking cases early. Because every stalking case is potentially lethal, 

the sooner police identify stalking, the greater the chance of protecting the victim 

from physical harm. Stalking behavior commonly escalates over time, with stalkers 

becoming increasingly obsessive and more willing to become violent. You can more 

easily identify stalking cases by asking victims if there are other related incidents, 

reviewing incident reports each day, examining protective orders for language 

suggesting repeated behavior, and reviewing the calls for service history.

2. Getting effective victim input. You should actively engage victims in investigations. 

They can provide ongoing information about the contacts the stalker makes in 

person, through voice mail, in letters, in faxes, in email, or through unwanted gifts, 

and describe the fear they feel as a result. Victims’ family members, neighbors, 

employers, coworkers, and others are also potentially important witnesses. They are 

often very aware of the stalking behavior and can corroborate victims’ statements.
| 20 |

Stalking

3. Ensuring that victims receive consistent, professional support services throughout 

the criminal justice process. Counselors and victim advocates can help victims be 

effective witnesses and take proper steps to protect themselves.† They can maintain 

frequent contact with victims and stress the importance of carefully documenting 

all stalking incidents; help victims create and maintain stalking logs, devise safety 

plans, and develop supportive networks; assess victim needs and help victims to access 

housing, health, and mental health services; and help victims weigh the advantages 

and disadvantages of civil protection orders. In addition, victim advocates can help 

police develop more effective anti-stalking policies and train officers to apply them.

Some stalking victims may have special needs. Such victims include those with mental 

illness, substance abuse problems, or disabilities; the elderly; ethnic and religious 

minorities; those with immigration issues; those who are illiterate or cannot speak or 

read English; and those being stalked by someone of the same gender.

4. Using a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach. Stalking victims often require 

a broad range of services. A collaborative approach encourages quicker responses 

from the most appropriate providers.‡ Among the community resources that may be 

necessary to address stalking are the following: 

•	 Domestic violence shelters

•	 Mental health treatment providers

•	 Housing associations

•	 Schools and colleges

•	 Faith-based programs

•	 Neighborhood watch organizations

•	 Victim advocacy organizations

† The Domestic Violence Intervention Project in Alexandria, Virginia, created a support group for stalking victims to address their 

particular safety concerns and emotional needs. The project developed “stalking sacks” to help victims build their cases, as well as

provide for their safety. Sacks include stalking logs, notebooks, disposable cameras, latex gloves, plastic bags, books about stalking,

microcassette recorders, cell phones, personal alarms, pepper spray, and copies of the stalking statute, among other items

‡ The San Diego Stalking Strike Force was established in the mid-1990s. It comprises police officials, prosecutors, judges, victim

advocates, and mental health professionals. It promotes stalking awareness, makes training recommendations, and develops

model protocols for stalker treatment programs. Its Stalking Case Assessment Team, which includes police, prosecutors, victim

witness advocates, probation officials, and mental health professionals, meets regularly to address problems reported by the 

police or stalking victims
| 21 |

Responses to the Problem of Stalking

The various law enforcement agencies in your area should also develop systems for 

sharing information and coordinating responses when stalking occurs in multiple 

jurisdictions. Police should work with major employers to make sure they have 

workplace violence policies and protocols in place and offer support to employees 

who are being victimized. Coworkers and supervisors of stalking victims should know 

what to do if stalking behavior occurs at work. In addition, telephone and Internet 

service providers should have policies and protocols that protect victims’ personal 

information and block stalkers’ ability to contact victims.

5. Enforcing all relevant laws. Stalking statutes should be enforced in conjunction 

with all other relevant laws. Police can rely on laws against domestic violence, phone 

harassment, vandalism, voyeurism, trespass, court-order violations, and many other 

crimes to hold stalkers accountable and protect victims. Sometimes it is just as 

effective to charge under a non-stalking statute. For instance, violations of protection 

orders often allow prosecutors to have supervision conditions imposed on offenders 

until stalking cases are ready for prosecution, and to secure convictions. In all cases, 

all relevant laws should be considered. 

6. Assessing the threat the stalker poses. Threat assessment is crucial to controlling 

stalking.30 You should assess each case individually. Be alert to offender characteristics 

and behaviors that suggest the stalker may become violent.31 Prior sexual intimacy, 

prior criminal convictions, and substance abuse are among the strongest predictors 

of stalker violence.32 Former intimates often know their victims’ daily routines 

and schedules, and have special access to their victims (e.g., through child custody 

arrangements). Thus they often pose the most significant physical risks to victims.†

Other factors to consider include explicit threats, symbolic violence, personality 

disorders and the presence or absence of a major mental disorder.33 Former intimates 

who stalk often suffer from personality disorders but do not necessarily suffer from 

major mental disorders. The absence of a major mental disorder can also be an 

indication that the offender is capable of formulating an organized plan. For this 

reason, the mental health of an offender should be considered. In addition to helping 

police prioritize cases and devise case strategy, a thorough threat assessment can 

provide valuable information regarding bail issues, conditions of release, sentencing, 

and probation, and provide the basis for mental health interventions such as 

involuntary hospitalization. 

† Former intimates can also harm their victims in nonphysical ways. For example, knowing victims’ bank account and social

security numbers can help them destroy their victims’ credit through methods such as identity theft
| 22 |

Stalking

Intervention Level Actions to Protect Victims Actions to Control Offenders

Level 1

First police awareness

•	 Gather information.

•	 Help the victim develop and implement

a safety plan.

•	 Help the victim obtain a protective order.

Refer the victim to support services.

•	 Deliver the first official warning to the offender,

explaining the law and policy.

•	 Check whether the offender has prior arrests and

convictions.

•	 Arrest the offender if probable cause exists.

•	 If applicable, contact the offender’s probation or

parole officer and enlist his or her help.

•	 Refer the offender to counseling or other services

that may control his or her behavior.

•	 Conduct a threat assessment (referring to the next

level, if appropriate).

Level 2

Second incident, 

warranting stalking 

charges or indicating 

an escalation in 

behavior

•	 Increase the victim’s personal and home

security by providing him or her with a

cell phone, a personal alarm, or video

surveillance.

•	 If the victim consents, consider enlisting

the aid of family members, neighbors,

coworkers, and community watch

associations.

•	 Continue using victim advocates

to update the safety plan when

appropriate, as well as explore safe

locations for the victim should he or she

need temporary housing.

•	 Arrest the offender under the stalking statute or

other appropriate statutes.

•	 Revise the threat assessment, and use it to oppose

or influence bail.

•	 Increase offender monitoring.

•	 Begin surveillance of the offender.

•	 Use technology to identify the offender’s locations

and actions.

•	 Consider other interventions such as psychiatric

evaluation and/or civil commitment of the offender.

7. Warning and arresting stalkers. Some stalkers may not know their behavior is 

criminal; others may believe their behavior is acceptable due to their relationship 

with the victim. You should firmly inform offenders about what behavior constitutes 

stalking in your state. When probable cause exists, you should promptly arrest stalkers. 

(Following arrest, prosecutors should seek bail and sentencing conditions requiring 

supervision of stalkers and restricting their contact with victims.)
| 23 |

Responses to the Problem of Stalking

Intervention Level Actions to Protect Victims Actions to Control Offenders

Level 3

Subsequent incidents

•	 Increase security and safety systems to

the highest level. Continue helping the

victim update the safety plan. Refer the

victim to a “safe house” or other shelter

unknown to the offender.

•	 Formulate a plan with the victim for

responding to an emergency situation.

•	 Increase prosecution and surveillance efforts.

Monitor the offender’s activity whenever possible.

•	 Arrest the offender or deter him or her in any way

possible, including civil commitment.

•	 Continue reevaluating and revising the threat

assessment.

•	 Plan for a possible emergency, such as violence at

the victim’s workplace, home, or school; violence

toward anyone perceived as blocking the offender’s

access to the victim; and other scenarios, such

as a possible homicide/suicide or hostage-taking/

barricade.

Level 4

Emergency 

intervention

•	 Implement the emergency response

plan.

•	 Use all available means to secure the

victim’s safety, including emergency

response teams, if necessary.

•	 Document the reasons for implementing

this response.

•	 Implement the emergency response plan.

•	 Use all available means to eliminate the threat to

the victim, the public, and those responding to the

situation.

•	 Document the reasons for implementing this

response.

8. Adopting a graduated-response stalking protocol. A graduated-response stalking 

protocol determines the appropriate police intervention level based on the particular 

incident and its context in the pattern of stalking behavior. It also allocates resources 

to protect victims and control offenders. The following illustrates how such a protocol 

works.†

Although the protocol specifies interventions based on the number of incidents, it 

also allows for more intensive interventions, depending on the severity of the case. 

For example, a case involving a violent attack by a stalker may be assigned a Level 3 

response, even if the assault is the first incident. 

† A complete discussion about developing an effective stalking protocol can be found in a companion document prepared by 

the National Center for Victims of Crime (2002)
| 24 |

Stalking

9. Monitoring stalkers and gathering evidence. Surveilling stalkers enables police to 

gather direct evidence of stalking behavior, and provides corroboration for victim 

accounts of similar incidents. Electronic monitoring helps ensure that the offender 

physically stays away from the victim while on bail or other conditional release.

10. Providing victims with a single point of contact. To the extent possible, stalking 

victims should be assigned a single point of contact in the police department (and 

a single point of contact in the prosecutor’s office, if criminal charges are filed), to 

ensure that the case file contains all relevant information and the victim receives 

consistent advice. In addition, all police officers should be trained in stalking 

investigation and response so they can properly assist victims should the single point 

of contact be unavailable.
| 25 |

Appendix 

Appendix: Summary of Responses 

to Stalking

The table below summarizes the responses to stalking, the mechanism by which they are 

intended to work, the conditions under which they ought to work best, and some factors 

you should consider before implementing a particular response. It is critical that you tailor 

responses to local circumstances, and that you can justify each response based on reliable 

analysis. In most cases, an effective strategy will involve implementing several different 

responses. Law enforcement responses alone are seldom effective in reducing or solving the 

problem.

Response 

No.

Page 

No.

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

1 19 Identifying stalking 

cases early

Allows the system 

to address stalking 

before cases escalate

...the police 

department 

implements a clear 

stalking protocol 

and trains all 

officers in the 

screening of stalking 

cases

Requires the 

department to 

identify and track 

repeat crimes

2 19 Getting effective 

victim input

Provide police with 

the information 

necessary to 

apprehend, build 

prosecutable cases 

against, and deter 

stalkers

...victims trust 

police

Police should 

also solicit input 

from the victim's 

family members, 

neighbors, employer, 

coworkers, and 

others

3 20 Ensuring that 

victims receive 

consistent, 

professional support 

services throughout 

the criminal justice 

process

Victims create 

safety plans and 

receive support from 

advocates, thereby 

ensuring victim 

safety and support 

while saving the 

police department's 

manpower resources

...the department 

encourages the use 

of advocates and 

officers are trained 

to use them in 

stalking cases

Requires the 

availability of 

advocates trained 

and experienced in 

safety planning
| 26 |

Stalking

Response 

No.

Page 

No.

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

4 20 Using a 

collaborative, 

multidisciplinary 

approach

Gathers service 

providers and 

community 

resources to 

coordinate a wideranging response; 

ensures that the 

victim's personal 

information and 

privacy are protected

...all applicable 

service providers 

and stakeholders 

are included in the 

problem-solving 

effort

Requires that 

all involved 

develop working 

relationships and 

coordinate together

5 21 Enforcing all 

relevant laws

Deters and/or 

incapacitates the 

stalker

...police recognize 

the stalking pattern 

early on

Requires 

cooperation from 

prosecutors

6 21 Assessing the threat 

the stalker poses

Identifies the 

stalking motives 

and threat levels, 

and enables the 

development of an 

effective response for 

the particular victim

...police gather 

sufficient reliable 

information on 

which to assess the 

threat

Requires the 

commitment 

of investigative 

resources to properly 

assess threats in 

individual cases

7 22 Warning and 

arresting stalkers

Deters and/or 

incapacitates stalkers

...stalkers are 

genuinely unaware 

that their conduct 

is illegal and/or 

threatening, and 

police recognize the 

threat stalkers pose

Requires 

cooperation from 

prosecutors
| 27 |

Appendix 

Response 

No.

Page 

No.

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations

8 23 Adopting a 

graduated-response 

stalking protocol

Tailors the official 

response to the 

threat each stalking 

incident poses, 

thereby increasing 

the likelihood of 

effectiveness while 

conserving scarce 

resources

...there are 

adequate resources 

available to 

respond to stalking, 

and sufficient 

information in 

each case to tailor 

the appropriate 

response

Protocol should be 

sufficiently flexible 

to adapt to the 

circumstances of 

each case

9 24 Monitoring stalkers 

and gathering 

evidence

Improves the 

development of 

criminal cases 

against stalkers

...the police 

department 

prioritizes stalking 

cases to make 

officers and other 

resources available

Surveillance of 

suspects can be 

labor-intensive

10 24 Providing victims 

with a single point 

of contact

Enhances the 

quantity and quality 

of the information 

victims provide to 

police; enhances 

victims' confidence 

in police and 

willingness to assist 

with prosecutions

...the contact is 

provided with all 

relevant information 

to assist victims

All police officers 

should receive basic 

training in stalking

| 29 |

References

References

Brewster, M. (2003). “Power and Control Dynamics in Prestalking and Stalking 

Situations.” Journal of Family Violence 18(4): 207–217.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (2001). Homicide Trends in the U.S., Intimate Partner Homicide. 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 

Fein, R., B. Vossekuil, and G. Holden (1995). Threat Assessment: An Approach to Prevent 

Targeted Violence. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute 

of Justice.

McFarlane, J., J. Campbell, S. Wilt, C. Sachs, Y. Ulrich, X. Xu. (1999). “Stalking and 

Intimate Partner Femicide.” Homicide Studies 3(4): 300–316.

Meloy, J. (2002). “Stalking and Violence.” In J. Boon and L. Sheridan (eds.), Stalking and 

Psychosexual Obsession: Psychological Perspectives for Prevention, Policing, and Treatment. 

West Sussex (United Kingdom): John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

____(1998). The Psychology of Stalking: Clinical and Forensic Perspectives. New York: 

Academic Press.

Mullen, P., M. Pathe, and R. Purcell (2000a). “Same-Gender Stalking.” Journal of the 

American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 28(2): 191–197.

____(2000b). Stalkers and Their Victims. New York: Cambridge University Press.

National Center for Victims of Crime (2002). Creating an Effective Stalking 

Protocol. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services. Accessible at www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.

asp?Open=True&Item=808.

National Criminal Justice Association (1993). Project to Develop a Model Anti-Stalking 

Code for States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of 

Justice.

Tjaden, P., and N. Thoennes (2000). “Stalking in America: Prevalence, Characteristics, 

and Police Response.” In C. Brito and E. Gratto (eds.), Problem-Oriented Policing: 

Crime-Specific Problems, Critical Issues, and Making POP Work. Washington, D.C.: 

Police Executive Research Forum.

____(1998). Stalking in America: Findings From the National Violence Against Women 

Survey. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 

and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
| 30 |

Stalking

U.S. Department of Justice (2001). Stalking and Domestic Violence: Report to Congress. 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.

Wright, J., A.G. Burgess, A.W. Burgess, A. Laszlo, G. McCrary, and J. Douglas (1996). “A 

Typology of Interpersonal Stalking.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 11(4): 487–502.
| 31 |

Endnotes

Endnotes

1. Adapted from National Criminal Justice Association (1993). 

2. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

3. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

4. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

5. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

6. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

7. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

8. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

9. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

10. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

11. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

12. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

13. Brewster (2003).

14. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2001).

15. Meloy (1998).

16. McFarlane et al. (1999).

17. McFarlane et al. (1999).

18. Tjaden and Thoennes (2000).

19. Tjaden and Thoennes (2000).

20. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).

21. Meloy (1998).

22. Wright et al. (1996).

23. Meloy (2002).

24. Meloy (1998).

25. Mullen, Pathe, and Purcell (2000b). 

26. Tjaden and Thoennes (1998).
| 32 |

Stalking

27. Mullen, Pathe, and Purcell (2000b). 

28. U.S. Department of Justice (2001).

29. U.S. Department of Justice (2001).

30. Fein, Vossekuil, and Holden (1995).

31. Meloy (2002).

32. Meloy (2002).

33. Meloy (2002).
| 33 |

About the Authors

About the Authors

This guide was developed by the Stalking Resource Center of the National Center for 

Victims of Crime. The Stalking Resource Center’s mission is to raise public awareness 

about stalking, and to encourage local multidisciplinary responses. The Stalking Resource 

Center is funded by the Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice. 

The primary authors of this guide are Susan Herman, Executive Director of the National 

Center for Victims of Crime, and Matthew Markon, Program Attorney for the Stalking 

Resource Center and former Montgomery County, Maryland, police officer. Tracy Bahm, 

Director of the Stalking Resource Center, and Michael Kaiser, Director of Programs, also 

contributed to this effort. As indicated in the acknowledgments, this project grew out of a 

previous project funded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, to create a model stalking protocol. Joseph Ryan, Trudy Gregorie, David 

Anderson, and all others involved in the previous project are owed a huge debt of gratitude 

for their outstanding contributions. 

| 35 |

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

Problem-Specific Guides Series:

1. Assaults in and Around Bars, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly Dedel. 

2006. ISBN: 1-932582-00-2

2. Street Prostitution, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly Dedel. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-01-0

3. Speeding in Residential Areas, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott with David K. 

Maddox. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-02-7

4. Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes. Rana Sampson. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-03-7

5. False Burglar Alarms, 2nd Edition. Rana Sampson. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-04-5

6. Disorderly Youth in Public Places. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-05-3

7. Loud Car Stereos. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-06-1

8. Robbery at Automated Teller Machines. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-07-X

9. Graffiti. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-08-8

10. Thefts of and From Cars in Parking Facilities. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-09-6

11. Shoplifting. Ronald V. Clarke. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-10-X

12. Bullying in Schools. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-11-8

13. Panhandling. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-12-6

14. Rave Parties. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-13-4

15. Burglary of Retail Establishments. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-14-2

16. Clandestine Methamphetamine Labs, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly 

Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-15-0

17. Acquaintance Rape of College Students. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-16-9

18. Burglary of Single-Family Houses. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-17-7

19. Misuse and Abuse of 911. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-18-5

20. Financial Crimes Against the Elderly. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2003. 

ISBN: 1-932582-22-3

21. Check and Card Fraud. Graeme R. Newman. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-27-4

22. Stalking. The National Center for Victims of Crime. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-30-4

23. Gun Violence Among Serious Young Offenders. Anthony A. Braga. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-31-2

24. Prescription Fraud. Julie Wartell and Nancy G. La Vigne. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-33-9 
| 36 |

Stalking

25. Identity Theft. Graeme R. Newman. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-35-3

26. Crimes Against Tourists. Ronald W. Glensor and Kenneth J. Peak. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-36-3

27. Underage Drinking. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-39-8

28. Street Racing. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-42-8

29. Cruising. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-43-6

30. Disorder at Budget Motels. Karin Schmerler. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-41-X

31. Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets. Alex Harocopos and Mike Hough. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-45-2

32. Bomb Threats in Schools. Graeme R. Newman. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-46-0

33. Illicit Sexual Activity in Public Places. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-47-9

34. Robbery of Taxi Drivers. Martha J. Smith. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-50-9

35. School Vandalism and Break-Ins. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. ISBN: 1-9325802-51-7

36. Drunk Driving. Michael S. Scott, Nina J. Emerson, Louis B. Antonacci, and Joel B. 

Plant. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-57-6

37. Juvenile Runaways. Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1932582-56-8

38. The Exploitation of Trafficked Women. Graeme R. Newman. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-59-2

39. Student Party Riots. Tamara D. Madensen and John E. Eck. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-60-6

40. People with Mental Illness. Gary Cordner. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-63-0

41. Child Pornography on the Internet. Richard Wortley and Stephen Smallbone. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-65-7

42. Witness Intimidation. Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-67-3

43. Burglary at Single-Family House Construction Sites. Rachel Boba and Roberto 

Santos. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-00-2

44. Disorder at Day Laborer Sites. Rob T. Guerette. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-72-X

45. Domestic Violence. Rana Sampson. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-74-6

46. Thefts of and from Cars on Residential Streets and Driveways. Todd Keister. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-76-2

47. Drive-By Shootings. Kelly Dedel. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-77-0

48. Bank Robbery. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-78-9

49. Robbery of Convenience Stores. Alicia Altizio and Diana York. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-79-7

50. Traffic Congestion Around Schools. Nancy G. La Vigne. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-82-7

51. Pedestrian Injuries and Fatalities. Justin A. Heinonen and John E. Eck. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-83-5
| 37 |

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

52. Bicycle Theft. Shane D. Johnson, Aiden Sidebottom, and Adam Thorpe. 2008. 

ISBN: 1-932582-87-8

53. Abandoned Vehicles. Michael G. Maxfield. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-88-6

54. Spectator Violence in Stadiums. Tamara D. Madensen and John E. Eck. 2008. 

ISBN: 1-932582-89-4

55. Child Abuse and Neglect in the Home. Kelly Dedel. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-00-3

56. Homeless Encampments. Sharon Chamard. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-01-0

57. Stolen Goods Markets. Michael Sutton. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-09-6

58. Theft of Scrap Metal. Brandon R. Kooi. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-12-6

59. Street Robbery. Khadija M. Monk, Justin A. Heinonen, and John E. Eck. 2010. 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-13-3

60. Theft of Customers’ Personal Property in Cafés and Bars. Shane D. Johnson, Kate 

J. Bowers, Lorraine Gamman, Loreen Mamerow, and Anna Warne. 2010. 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-15-7

61. Aggressive Driving. Colleen Laing. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-18-8

62. Sexual Assault of Women by Strangers. Kelly Dedel. 2011. ISBN: 978-1-935676-43-0

63. Export of Stolen Vehicles Across Land Borders. Gohar Petrossian and Ronald V. 

Clarke. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-935676-59-1 

64. Abandoned Buildings and Lots. Jon M. Shane. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-01-7

65. Animal Cruelty. Kelly Dedel. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-05-5

66. Missing Persons. Kenna Quinet. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-20-8

67. Gasoline Drive-Offs. Bruno Meini and Ronald V. Clarke. 2012. 

ISBN: 978-1-932582-15-4

68. Chronic Public Inebriation. Matthew Pate. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-07-9

69. Drug-Impaired Driving. Joe Kuhns. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-08-6

70. Home Invasion Robbery. Justin A. Heinonen and John E. Eck. 2012. 

ISBN: 978-1-932582-16-1

Response Guides Series:

1. The Benefits and Consequences of Police Crackdowns. Michael S. Scott. 2003. 

ISBN: 1-932582-24-X

2. Closing Streets and Alleys to Reduce Crime: Should You Go Down This Road?

Ronald V. Clarke. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-41-X

3. Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety Problems. Michael S. Scott 

and Herman Goldstein. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-55-X

4. Video Surveillance of Public Places. Jerry Ratcliffe. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-58-4

5. Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns. Emmanuel Barthe. 2006. 

ISBN: 1-932582-66-5
| 38 |

Stalking

6. Sting Operations. Graeme R. Newman with assistance of Kelly Socia. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-84-3

7. Asset Forfeiture. John L. Worall. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-90-8 

8. Improving Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas. Ronald V. Clarke. 

2008. ISBN: 1-932582-91-6

9. Dealing With Crime and Disorder in Urban Parks. Jim Hilborn. 2009. 

ISBN: 1-932582-92-4

10. Assigning Police Officers to Schools. Barbara Raymond. 2010. 

ISBN: 978-1-935676-14-0

Problem-Solving Tools Series: 

1. Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police ProblemSolvers. John E. Eck. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-19-3

2. Researching a Problem. Ronald V. Clarke and Phyllis A. Schultze. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-48-7

3. Using Offender Interviews to Inform Police Problem-Solving. Scott H. Decker. 

2005. ISBN: 1-932582-49-5

4. Analyzing Repeat Victimization. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-54-1

5. Partnering with Businesses to Address Public Safety Problems. Sharon Chamard. 

2006. ISBN: 1-932582-62-2

6. Understanding Risky Facilities. Ronald V. Clarke and John E. Eck. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-75-4

7. Implementing Responses to Problems. Rick Brown and Michael S. Scott. 2007. 

ISBN: 1-932582-80-0

8. Using Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design in Problem-Solving.

Diane Zahm. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-81-9

9. Enhancing the Problem-Solving Capacity of Crime Analysis Units. Matthew B. 

White. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-85-1

10. Analyzing Crime Displacement and Diffusion. Rob T. Guerette. 2009. 

ISBN: 1-932582-93-2
| 39 |

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

Special Publications:

Crime Analysis for Problem Solvers in 60 Small Steps. Ronald V. Clarke and 

John E. Eck. 2005. ISBN:1-932582-52-5

Policing Terrorism: An Executive’s Guide. Graeme R. Newman and 

Ronald V. Clarke. 2008.

Effective Policing and Crime Prevention: A Problem-Oriented Guide for Mayors, 

City Managers, and County Executives. Joel B. Plant and Michael S. Scott. 2009. 

Upcoming Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides

Home Invasion Robbery

Prescription Fraud and Abuse, 2nd Edition

Physical and Emotional Abuse of the Elderly

Insurance Fraud by Arson

Hate Crimes

Robbery of Pharmacies

Problem-Solving Tools

Understanding Repeat Offending

Understanding Hot Products

Identifying and Defining Policing Problems

Response Guides

Monitoring Offenders on Conditional Release

Using Civil Actions Against Property to Control Crime Problems

Special Publications

Intelligence Analysis and Problem-Solving

Problem-Oriented Policing Implementation Manual

For a complete and up-to-date listing of all available POP Guides, see the Center for 

Problem-Oriented Policing website at www.popcenter.org.

For more information about the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series and other 

COPS Office publications, call the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770, 

via e-mail at AskCopsRC@usdoj.gov, or visit COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov.
| 40 |

Stalking

www.ncvc.org 800.FYI.CALL 202.467.8700

Founded in 1985, the National Center for Victims of Crime is the nation’s leading 

resource and advocacy organization for victims of crime. Our mission is to forge a national 

commitment to help victims of crime rebuild their lives. We are dedicated to serving 

individuals, families, and communities harmed by crime. Working with local, state, and 

federal partners, the National Center:

•	 Provides direct services and resources to victims of crime and victim service providers

•	 Advocates for passage of laws and public policies that create resources and secure rights 

and protections for crime victims

•	 Delivers training and technical assistance to victim service organizations, counselors, 

attorneys, criminal justice agencies, and allied professionals

•	 Fosters cutting-edge thinking about the impact of crime and the ways in which each of 

us can help victims regain control of their lives

The Stalking Resource Center is a program of the National Center for Victims of 

Crime. Our dual mission is to raise national awareness of stalking and to encourage 

the development and implementation of multidisciplinary responses to stalking in local 

communities across the country. We can provide you with:

•	 Training

•	 Technical assistance

•	 Protocol development

•	 Resources

•	 Help in collaborating with other agencies and systems in your community
Got a problem? We’ve got answers!

Log onto the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing website at 

www.popcenter.org for a wealth of information to help you deal 

more effectively with crime and disorder in your community, 

including:

•	 Recommended readings in problem-oriented policing 

and situational crime prevention

•	 A complete listing of other POP Guides

•	 A listing of forthcoming POP Guides

Designed for police and those who work with them to address 

community problems, www.popcenter.org is a great resource for 

problem-oriented policing.

Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office).

Center for Problem-Oriented Policing
Stalking creates uncertainty, instills fear, and can completely disrupt lives

This guide reviews the problem of stalking and the factors that contribute to it

It identifies a series of questions to help law enforcement analyze their local 

problem. Finally, it reviews responses to the problem of stalking and what is

known about them from evaluative research and police practice

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

145 N Street, N.

Washington, DC 20530

To obtain details on COPS Office programs, 

call the COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.67

Visit COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov

First published January 2004. Updated July 201

ISBN: 1-932582-30-4 e07129492

Scan this QR code with your 

smartphone for more information 

about the POP Guides Series, or visit 

www.popcenter.o