'How to get Away With the Ultimate Murder,' Author Unknown

by Susan Murphy Milano

Late last week, a Michigan jury found Doug Stewart guilty of the murder of his wife, Venus Stewart, who was abducted from just outside her parents' home in Michigan April 26, 2010. The relationship had a documented history of violence. Venus Stewart filed for divorce and moved out of the marital home. Doug Stewart, according to police reports, was furious with her sending text messages and emails, demanding she return with the kids or “you know what will happen if you don’t.” Once she was finally able to leave the toxic and dangerous environment, as in all intimate partner violence relationships, the abuser went into action plan mode. 

The victim files numerous police reports and has court orders of protection; she tells friends and family she is in fear for her life. Why? Because he lost ownership, power and control over the person with whom they married. In the inner workings of an abuser’s mind, “till death do us part” is now their goal.

As an angry abuser, not wanting the person with whom I am in a relationship to leave, I am going to boil over like hot liquid on a stove. And, as an abuser, I have a lot of time to think out a plan of action. In the beginning, after the victim leaves, I am going to threaten the person where no one else can hear me. I will make a victim's life unbearable during the divorce process, especially in court mandated mediation meetings with mental health evaluators, while sitting dressed neatly and showing the world what a wonderful person I am. The moment the session is over I will shoot those looks of "now you did it" and "you are going to pay for this if you do not return to me." Next, as custody of the kids is being determined, as an abuser, I am outraged and think about how "she is not getting away with this alive."

I then, as the abuser, figure out where to get that special "handbook" available to members only in an eBook format that the recently formed "secret society of abusers" are all reading, titled How to Get Away With the Ultimate Murder, author unknown.

For some abusers, in my expert opinion, the handbook has worked in cases where the victim has vanished without a trace. There must be a chapter in the "handbook" on how to correctly lawyer up, as you will notice with each person of interest in cases where the wife is reported missing, the last person to see them no longer cooperates with authorities. In the blink of an eye, most persons of interest hire a fairly skilled defense attorney in the early stages. The legal hired armor acts as the shield or the mouth piece for the only person, once again in my expert opinion, behind the vanishing act of their loved one. Perfect example is the upcoming trial for the murder of missing mother Renee Pernice. Her husband, Shon Pernice, who is awaiting trial, secured an attorney immediately.

Isn't it rather strange that the victim is often the mother of their children, estranged wife or girlfriend? And, more often than not, they are going through a divorce or custody battle. And, yes, I need to mention that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

All of these cases have a common theme: The person has been erased from the planet, never to be seen or heard from again. A common theme does not make one guilty of the crime, but it is highly unusual that the person with whom the relationship has ended, in cases of intimate partner violence, does not have a motive. The facts, although circumstantial, do carry a lot of weight but is often not enough for a grand jury indictment, unless you have a body.

The prosecutor, John McDonough, went ahead and tried the Stewart case without a body. Not an easy task. But, he had enough circumstantial evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Douglas Stewart was found guilty by a jury of first-degree premeditated murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree premeditated murder. Stewart is scheduled for sentencing sometime next month. The remains of Venus Stewart have yet to be found.

Venus Stewart is still missing. Anyone with information on the case is asked to contact Michigan State Police White Pigeon Post at 269-483-7611 or Rockford Regional Dispatch Center at 616-866-6666.

Tweet

How To Stop a Stalker

by Gina Simmons, Ph.D.

Whip-smart, blonde, from a loving family, Peggy enthusiastically prepared for medical school. For the past three years, she'd dated a man named Patrick. Her family noticed changes in her personality after she entered into a relationship with Patrick. Peggy then broke up with him. Patrick relentlessly called, followed, and sent messages to Peggy. He jumped out of the bushes at her workplace with flowers, a ring, and a marriage proposal. Peggy insisted the relationship was over. Patrick circulated a flier in her neighborhood slandering her. Peggy reported Patrick's behavior to the police.

January is National Stalking Awareness Month, and cases like Peggy's highlight the importance of educating women.

That's because most stalking victims are women. In fact, one in twelve women will face victimization-by-stalking within her lifetime. One in 45 men will experience stalking victimization. Most victims of stalking knew their offender in some way. About 10 percent of victims were stalked for five years or more. About four in ten stalkers threaten not only the victim, but also the victim's family, friends, co-workers and even the family pet. Stalkers threaten workplaces and the community.

Peggy and her family went out of state to attend her brother's wedding. She brought her new boyfriend, Mark, with her. Patrick took the opportunity, in the family's absence, to vandalize Peggy's mother's home in Ohio and burn down Peggy's boyfriend's house in Albuquerque. Peggy, her family, and her boyfriend reported the crimes to the police.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics issued a Special Report on stalking victimization in 2009. Researchers found that typical stalking behaviors include:

• making unwanted telephone calls
• sending unsolicited and unwanted letters or e-mails
• following and/or spying on the victim
• showing up at places the victim attends without a legitimate reason
• waiting at places the victim is expected to attend
• leaving unwanted items, presents, or flowers
• posting information or spreading rumors about the victim on the internet, in a public place, or by word of mouth

If you have experienced at least one of these behaviors on more than one occasion, felt fear for your safety or the safety of a family member as a result of that behavior, or experienced additional behaviors that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear, then you are a victim of stalking. Victims stalked by a previous sexual partner are at higher risk for violence. 76 percent of female murder victims were stalked by their intimate partner and 67 percent experienced physical abuse. Of those who were physically abused, 89 percent had also been stalked in the twelve months before their murder.

Peggy, her boyfriend and family felt frustrated at the delays in the trial against Patrick. Despite the threats, vandalism and relentless pursuit of Peggy, Patrick still remained free. With his trial months away, and in fear for her safety, Peggy went into hiding. She set up a new life in another state, hundreds of miles from her stalker. She informed her new employer, friends and neighbors, advising them to call police if they saw her stalker. Peggy kept an unlisted phone number and address, and communicated with her family using every security precaution.

In 1990, California became the first state to enact an anti-stalking statute. Since then, every state has passed some type of anti-stalking or anti-harassment legislation. Judge Wells, former head of the Stalking Unit at the San Diego District Attorney's Office, said that there is no one profile of a stalker. Studies suggest that stalkers come from all walks of life. Stalkers can be intelligent, charming, and sophisticated, while some appear mentally ill, have controlling, dependent or narcissistic personality traits. The most dangerous, like Patrick, often have a love affair with guns and the power they can wield with weapons.

Patrick hired a private investigator to find Peggy. Even with a valid restraining order against him, the investigator gave him Peggy's location. Patrick checked an assault weapon and handgun at the airport, and flew to California. He picked up his bag with the two weapons and drove to Peggy's street. Posing as a detective he showed a delivery person Peggy's photo. The delivery person recognized Peggy and gave Patrick her exact address.

San Diego Superior Court Judge Kerry Wells says about stalking:

"The primary advantage to having a restraining order against the suspect is that it allows him to be immediately arrested when a violation occurs. It is thus vitally important that, when a police agency is attempting to utilize such orders as part of an overall intervention plan, the involved personnel be prepared to respond quickly to each violation. Only then is there a demonstration that the 'system' is determined to sanction the suspect in order to control his behavior." (From a presentation at the Stalking the Stalker Conference, 2001)

Restraining orders often provoke attacks because the perpetrator sees the order as humiliating or a threat to his power. If law enforcement can't respond in time, many victims obtain no protection from the order. A restraining order should not give victims any sense of security. Instead it should be seen as an aid to law enforcement. If the perpetrator is apprehended, a restraining order can allow stiffer penalties to hold him longer. As Wells says, a restraining order should be considered only one piece of a comprehensive protection plan.

Patrick attacked Peggy outside her home, duct-taped her hands and beat her head bloody with his gun. She broke away from him, ran into a neighbor's home, and called 911. Patrick broke down two doors to get to her. With the police outside the door, he shot Peggy in the back of the head and then killed himself.

How do you stop a stalker? Some victims report that the behavior stopped after the stalker was warned by police (15.6 percent). Others stopped after the victim agreed to talk with them (13.3 percent). About 12.2 percent of stalkers stopped after a friend or relative intervened. Only about a tenth of victims reported that a protective, restraining or stay away order stopped the stalking behavior. Threat Assessment expert, Gavin de Becker, cautions against giving pat answers to victims of stalking. Each case should be viewed individually, considering the behaviors of the perpetrator and victim within their unique context. If you're a victim of stalking, contact the Association of Threat Assessment Professionals for a referral.

Peggy Klinke's sister, Debbie Riddle, called the Stalking Resource Center, after her sister's tragic murder, with a passionate need to make things better for other stalking victims. She participated in a national program on Lifetime Television, hosted by Erin Brockovich, and a Lifetime video to train law enforcement about stalking. Last month, President Obama issued the first presidential proclamation declaring January, National Stalking Awareness Month.

We can all help by promoting National Stalking Awareness Month on our web and social media sites. Educate yourself and let others know about the Stalking Resource Center.

Peggy's last words, moments before she was shot, were:

"Please tell my mother that I love her. Please tell my niece that she will now have a guardian angel watching over her ... and tell my sister to name her baby after me."

For Peggy, her family, and all victims of stalking, let's never forget.

Tweet

The Forever Storm, and a Thanksgiving Prayer

by Susan Murphy Milano

Last year at this time, Karen Kahler of Columbia, Kansas, was finishing her workday and making plans to head out the next day with her daughter, Emily 18, Lauren, 16, and son, Sean, 10, for Thanksgiving. Their plan was to visit Dorothy Wright, 89, Karen's grandmother, in Burlingame, Kansas, for the holiday weekend. Karen had filed for divorce earlier in the year from her violent and abusive husband, and this was to be the first holiday away from Kraig Kahler since their marriage.

Thanksgiving day was without incident for Karen, 47 (pictured above with her daughters), and it was first real taste of freedom, away from the constant monitoring, via texting, phone calls and following she had endured. Karen and her family planned activities and enjoyed their time together with a great sense of peace. When Saturday rolled around, they spent the day in town and then headed back to Grandma’s to have dinner.

On November 28, 2009, while placing a roast in the oven, the front door swung open and the sound of bullets and screams filled the home. Hours earlier, according to authorities, Kraig Kahler had been outside, waiting for the perfect moment to kill his family. Investigators say Karen was shot first, then Lauren, Grandma Wright and, finally, Emily. In the chaos, Sean managed to escape, unharmed, running to a nearby neighbor for help.

At approximately 6:15 pm, officers were summoned to the home in Burlingame, where Karen was dead and three others were wounded. They were transported to a Topeka hospital, where Lauren and Emily died soon after arriving, and Grandma died a few days later.

For Sean Kahler, this is not only his first Thanksgiving without his mom, sisters and grandmother, it is a holiday he would rather forget. For as long as this young man lives, Thanksgiving and, frankly, his life, will be extremely difficult.

As hard as he tries to simply go on and live his life, something will undoubtedly always remind Sean of the tragedy. It could be something as innocent as the way a door is left open or hearing a mom call out to her son in a park. Perhaps a special song favored by his sisters will come on the radio. It takes so little for a victim of a violent crime to be reminded; the pain is like a permanent tattoo that can't be removed.

Some days will be better than others for Sean. At times, the pain will undoubtedly stalk him like his worst enemy. Only this isn't a presence Sean can simply order to go away. He'll never be able to run from it, in particular, on every Thanksgiving.

Unfortunately, his pain will be further magnified by the pending murder trial of his father. Sean Kahler, the lone survivor, is expected to be a key witness for the prosecution. After a handful of hearings, a court date is scheduled in December to determine if Sean can testify outside the courtroom by video camera. In my opinion, there should be no debate; Sean should not be forced to face the person who murdered his entire world.

Today, as you gather with family, my wish is for you to stop for a moment and say a prayer for Sean Kahler. Take a moment to leave words of hope and strength for Sean on this post. This young man has so little left to be thankful for. Pray that he can find peace one day and be thankful that his life was spared.

Tweet

Extreme Measures

by Gina Simmons, Ph.D.

Walking about the tree-lined, red-brick covered campus of San Diego City College, you can feel a hopeful energy. This multi-cultural, inner-city campus attracts bright teenagers, middle-aged professionals, recovering addicts and suburban housewives all seeking some sort of growth and advancement. As former adjunct psychology faculty at City College, I feel a deep sadness about the recent campus murder of 19-year-old student Diana Gonzalez.

Diana Gonzalez, the teenage mother of a 9-month-old baby, was found brutally murdered beyond recognition, in a restroom. She had recently filed a restraining order against her husband, Armando Perez, 37, though the order had not yet been served. In her police report Diana stated her husband kidnapped and raped her over a three-day period, dragging her to a series of motels. At one point he allegedly strangled her to the point of unconsciousness. Diana's parents were apparently so worried about her that they drove her to and from her night class. When she didn't make it back to the car, they called police.

The San Diego District Attorney's office failed to press charges against Armando Perez on the violence charges Diana reported. District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis refuses to answer questions about the case ,citing "on-going investigation" as the reason. The prime suspect, Armando Perez, remains free. His abandoned car was found in Tijuana, Mexico, a few days after Diana's murder.

Depending on the type of survey used, between 600,000 and six million domestic violence cases are reported each year. In the year 2000, 1,247 women were murdered by an intimate partner. That same year, 440 men nationwide were murdered by an intimate partner. These statistics show how difficult it is to predict which cases will escalate to homicide and which cases will not. Law enforcement and domestic violence experts know the challenges of protecting domestic violence victims. Once two people have sex with one another, they often continue to replay a drama of passion and violence. Studies show that domestic violence disturbance calls often place police in danger. Children in violent homes are more likely to be abused. I've worked with children injured while trying to protect a parent. One of my clients witnessed the beating of a woman by a man and was punched while trying to rescue her. Victims often continue contact with perpetrators, violating mutual restraining orders, frustrating therapists and security professionals alike.

It appears Diana did everything she could do legally to protect herself from further violence. She filed the police report and restraining order, gave consistent statements and attempted to stay away from her husband. However ,he still got to her. He stalked her. Diana's husband allegedly kidnapped her, after lying in wait, and, for three days, raped her. He also apparently stalked her at school. He has been officially charged with her murder with a "lying -in-wait" allegation, making him eligible for the death penalty.

Victims of intimate partner violence and stalking experience significant negative psychological and physical health symptoms. Anxiety, depression, stress-related illnesses and deteriorating health result from living in chronic fear. Dr. Pati Beaudoin says that victims of stalking experience social isolation, exhaustion, desperation, diminished concentration, and communication problems. At a time when clear thinking is required for self-defense, victims often feel cloudy headed, disoriented, numb.

Dr. Brian Spitzberg reports that one type of high-risk stalker is what he calls the organized stalker, a controlling individual motivated by hate. Violent stalkers often have what Dr. Spitzberg calls a power orientation, characterized by domineering behavior, a strong masculine sex role identity, and distrust. These traits, combined with social incompetence evidenced by jealousy, obsessional thinking and a lack of empathy, are strong predictors of violent behavior. Armando Perez demonstrated an extreme lack of empathy by leaving his infant child motherless and his three children from his previous marriage fatherless.

Armando Perez was married to Olga Vera-Perez for 14 years. They created three children. Armando abused Olga by choking her in 2009. He then moved on to abuse Diana. Casey Gwinn, president of the National Family Justice Center Alliance in San Diego, said about this case, "Based on the evidence we had and based on the evidence I've seen, and, as 20 years as a prosecutor, it appears to me that charges should have been filed in this case." Diana reported a history of more than 20 domestic violence incidents involving Perez. "Somebody should have been interviewing her about those," Gwinn said. "If they were misdemeanors the city attorney could have filed them." The system failed to protect Diana Gonzalez.

Threat assessment expert Gavin de Becker cautions against restraining orders in many situations of domestic violence. If someone abides by the law they might be deterred by it so therefore probably don't need one. If the perpetrator engages in criminal conduct, they already show a disregard for the law. A restraining order can provoke the individual to act out violently as they might see the order as a hostile threat requiring retaliation or as a threat to their dominance. In Diana's case, the restraining order had no effect, as it had not been served. The only effect it may have had was to give Diana and her family a false sense of security.

Naturally, anyone in Diana's position would yearn to return to a sense of normalcy after the trauma she endured. Going back to school to better her life and the life of her child was an honorable thing to do. Unfortunately, in domestic violence/stalking cases, a woman faces the greatest danger when she separates from her abuser. To protect yourself from a violent stalker, sometimes you must exercise extreme measures:

• Take a leave of absence from school, work, or any familiar places known to the stalker.
  
• Go to a domestic violence shelter. Shelter services provide a 60 to 70 percent reduction in incidence and severity of re-assault.
• Consult a threat-assessment professional. You can find referrals from the Association of Threat Assessment Professionals.
• Consult private security professionals. Follow their advice.
  
• Think like a stalker. How could someone find you? Where are you most vulnerable?
• Leave town. Don't stay with any known relatives or friends. Instead, stay with friends of friends or people unknown to the stalker.
  
• Get a second phone number for your personal calls. Leave the old phone number to receive messages so you can screen calls from the stalker and monitor his mood.
• Get a guard dog.
• While driving, make sure you're not followed. Test this by making four left turns.
• Hire a private investigator to monitor your stalker.

Not everyone can afford to implement all of these suggestions. However, you can increase your likelihood of survival the more you take responsibility for your own protection. Law enforcement reacts to crimes already committed or in progress. Depending on police to protect you may not ensure your safety. You may have to do things outside the boundaries of normal life. You may have to take extreme measures.

Tweet

Point, Click, Stalk?

By Robin Sax and Guest Contributor Melissa Alonzo Kriz

Ever pass by a building or landmark, wonder what it is, and wish you could find out right on the spot? Now you can -- with the click of your phone's camera and the launch of "Goggles," a new image-recognition technology that instantly provides pictures and information based on a single photo. The beta (still in testing) application was developed by Google to run on the Android operating system, also developed by Google for mobile devices.

This remarkable visual search technology soon will be expanded to allow a user to take a mobile-phone picture of an item (work of art, book, plant, etc.), then instantly search for similar images and information about the object on the Internet. As our technological capabilities increase exponentially, we might all say this was inevitable. We might be comfortable with how we'll use the new programs for fun and for good. 

But a pause is necessary.

Imagine you are at the gym or the grocery store, and a creep sidles up and manages to take a picture of you with his cell phone. Within seconds, using this image-recognition technology, he would have access to your photos on Facebook and find your name, where you work and live, and any other information about you that exists in cyberspace. That's a scary prospect. 

Take it one step further: What happens when predator aims his camera at a child on the playground? The predator would have access to similar images of the child on the web; they could lead to the child's name, school and possibly home address.

Goggles is currently limited to letting users find and learn about inanimate objects. However, technologies (including a yet-unreleased component of Goggles itself) already exist that use similar methods to crawl the web looking for images containing facial characteristics of people. The photos could be culled from your employer's public website, online community newsletters, schools' and universities' sites, Facebook and other social-networking sites, and any other public area on the web where your photo may reside (even without your knowledge).

Google has taken some heat for privacy concerns on some of its services, so for now it is holding off from releasing the facial-recognition aspect of Goggles. However, other software developers are already delivering mobile and web applications containing facial-recognition technology. Just look at your iPhoto if you are a Mac user.

The Swedish company The Astonishing Tribe (TAT) is currently testing a product called Recognizr. The TAT product allows a user to snap a photo of anyone in public, select the "recognize" button, and then receive photos and information about that person from social networking sites. TAT does have privacy policies; they offer an opt-in provision (or permission) from the subject of the photo in order for Recognizr to work. 

But TAT doesn't plan to offer its service directly to consumers. Instead, it will make the technology available to mobile-phone makers and phone-service provides so they can develop their own applications.These companies may or may not choose to follow TAT's privacy standards.

Face.com, an Israeli company, also has developed several products that include facial-recognition technology. Developers will be able to use and expand upon its services. One Face.com product, CelebrityFinder, uses facial recognition technology to pull all photos (and lookalikes) of a celebrity from Twitter feeds. Face.com is in the process of enhancing the face detection function to include profile poses. Face.com privacy policies say the use of its product may not violate user privacy, and that users must inform their subjects that they've been tagged and provide them the ability to remove those tags. I feel safe already.

The bottom line is that the facial recognition technology is already here. We live in a "point, click, and stalk" world. So how can we protect ourselves, and our families, from stalkers who'll use this technology to their criminal advantage? It is unlikely we can pass an enforceable law making it a crime to take a non-celebrity's photo in public, even if the photo taken is of a child.

Perhaps federal legislation could be aimed at the technology companies and mobile phone carriers? We could demand strong, mandatory privacy policies for the facial-recognition software from Face.com, TAT, and other developers as a pre-condition of sale or use. While this type of legislation wouldn't guarantee protection from illicit use of this potentially creepy technology, it would assist in increasing consumer awareness. Most of all, we must hold those who develop, host, and use the technology accountable so we can prevent the next wave of cyber-stalking before it begins.

Tweet

"Baby, We Will Find You"

by Susan Murphy-Milano

Keighley Ann Alyea went missing from her Overland Park, Kans., apartment on Sunday, Sept. 30. Within hours, unaware she was already dead, family and friends posted a missing person's bulletin and photos on the social-networking site Facebook. The information and offer of a reward spread quickly over the Internet. Strangers answered the plea for help finding the petite 18-year-old by holding prayer vigils in their own communities thousands of miles away.

Several days later, police found Keighley’s abandoned Mazda 626. The following day, the teenager's mother posted a message on Facebook: “Keighley, we are coming for you, baby. We will find you!”

But on Tuesday, Oct. 6, police reported Keighley's body was found in a Missouri farm field. They charged three young men with first-degree murder, aggravated kidnapping and aggravated robbery in her death. Family said Keighley had dated one of the men, 18-year-old Dustin Hilt, for about two years.

The couple broke up sometime last year; a friend said Keighley broke off the relationship because “he just wasn’t a good guy.” Hilt reportedly beat Keighley, and she told friends she was afraid of him.

Although the relationship appeared to be over, several friends say it was an on-again, off-again romance. According to one close friend, “Keighley had a very hard time saying no to him.” A few weeks before she disappeared, Hilt was reportedly tapping on her bedroom window in the middle of the night, calling and texting her constantly, and following Keighley around town. Sometime after the official break-up, Hilt had Keighley's name tattooed on his arm. All of Hilt's actions indicated he was dangerously and unpredictably obsessed with a young woman who'd rejected him.

According to her uncle, during the ride out of town sometime after Keighley was attacked and kidnapped, she regained consciousness, giving the three suspects a chance to get her medical help and maybe save her life. Instead, he said, they decided to "finish killing her."

If I had to guess, few people, including Keighley's mother and father, knew the extent of Hilt’s obsessive contact with their daughter. Most teens don't tell their parents about being harassed or stalked; instead, like Keighley, they confide in close friends. Sometimes young women who break off relationships don't recognize danger signs and instead expect former boyfriends will eventually give up and move on with their lives. They believe they have the situation is under control.

But they don't. If they are being stalked, they are in danger.

Stalking is defined as repeated, unwanted pursuit behaviors (such as following, watching, phone calls, and e-mails) that seem obsessive and make someone afraid or concerned for their safety. October happens to be National Domestic Violence Awareness Month. But 20 years after I began my work in this arena -- after my father murdered my mother -- we are still no closer to addressing this epidemic.

The laws created to protect victims of stalking and domestic violence were not signed into effect with ink but with the blood of all those whose cries for help fell on deaf ears. If you have school age children, and they are dating or have recently broken off a relationship, keep the door to communication open with your child. Find out if the person is treating them with respect. If the relationship has ended, ask whether they continue to receive phone calls, texts or e-mails begging to get back together.

If you are a friend or relative, encourage teens to tell their parents; strongly suggest parents convince their teens to see people who can help them. Go to your local police department, ask to speak to an officer or detective, and have them document your concerns as often as possible. If she is afraid, have your teenager get help by talking to a professional therapist or a psychiatrist.

The final entry on Keighley's Facebook page was from a man who will never see his daughter graduate from college. He won't see her marry, nor will he be waiting at a hospital to meet his first grandchild. To him, she'll always be as she was the day he learned of her murder.

“Keighley, we will never forget you and we will make sure no one else does either, love DAD.”

Tweet

When Stalking Goes Hi-Tech

by Robin Sax

Caller I.D., digital cameras, email, online bank accounts, pda’s, social networking websites—all are forms of technology that we use in our everyday lives to communicate, be readily accessible, preserve memories, and simplify our lives. In today’s fast-paced world, these modern technologies have become more than convenient--they have become necessities.

Unfortunately, as with all things, there’s a flip side to these very handy devices. They can be used against us by people who wish to do us harm or—at the very least—create havoc in our lives. Tech-savvy criminals can turn our favorite timesavers into tools to stalk, harass, and harm us.

While stalking and harassment are neither new crimes nor a new phenomenon, with the growth and expansion of technology the criminal’s stockpile of weapons has expanded. They no longer need to rely solely on using the postal service, or sneaking around a victim’s home, or listening on land lines to commit their crimes. As recent studies by the United States Department of Justice show, 78% of stalkers use more than one means to contact and harass their victims.

There is no greater consequence of the misuse of technology than in cases of stalking and harassment. Here, the combination of a criminal’s arsenal of technological weapons and the criminal’s desire for aggression puts the victim not only in a compromising position, but in a potentially lethal one.

So what can victims or would-be victims do to protect themselves in our high-tech society? Alexis A. Moore, a cyber-crime expert, boiled it down to her “Top 5” tips to protect ourselves from high-tech stalkers and cyberstalkers.

1. Do not rely on caller ID when deciding to answer the phone. Caller ID spoofing is a common practice used by high-tech cyberstalkers to deceive victims into answering the telephone to harass and frighten them. Those relying upon their Caller ID systems should be aware that for a small fee anyone may go online and purchase Caller ID spoof technology. This enables them to program their Caller ID to reveal any number and name they wish. Stalkers often use familiar telephone numbers to trick the unsuspecting victim into answering the phone. Screen your phone calls allow the answering machine to pick up and then answer. By allowing the answering machine to pick up, the stalkers may leave a message that could later be used as evidence in a civil or criminal proceeding. If it’s an important call, the calling party will leave a message. Be sure you stay in control of your safety and security!

2. Password protects all accounts including utilities. Passwords protect all accounts that will allow for this additional privacy protection measure. Besides adding a password to your accounts, also request to have the agency/entity contact you if there are any changes made to your accounts, including requests for account closures, electronic funds transfers or account cancellations. These techniques are often utilized by stalkers to maintain control over their victims. It is not uncommon for stalkers who have gone high-tech to cancel their victim’s utilities and telephones, make electronic funds transfers from their bank accounts, and/or close/cancel credit cards. Today, anyone sitting behind a computer screen can access an unsuspecting victim’s accounts without the risk of being tracked.

3. Notify family, friends and co-workers to withhold information about you from any third party. High-tech stalkers using caller-id spoofs and other means may contact third parties under false pretenses to obtain vital information about the victim’s activities and whereabouts. Anyone who contacts a third party for information about a possible victim should be given no information at all! High-tech predators can use the phone, e-mail or may send third parties ruses such as class reunions or even floral deliveries to find out the victim’s whereabouts and activities. In some cases predators have pretended to be law enforcement officers! Always ask for a call-back number to verify the caller’s identity and always error on the side of safety and privacy first. A good motto is always “Less information is best”!

4. Maintain old e-mail accounts and phone numbers and create new ones. When under siege by a high-tech stalker or cyberstalker, keep old cell phone and e-mail accounts open. A victim of stalking should use an old cell phone number, knowing that the stalker may access their present phone records and known e-mail accounts. To thwart a stalker or potential stalker, call and e-mail contacts you don’t do business with, make appointments by phone with doctors’ offices you won’t be treated by, attorneys you won’t be consulting with. In this way, you are throwing obstacles in the stalker’s path and keeping your daily activities private. An evasive cyberstalker will try to learn the victim’s activities and schedule, including appointments, to manipulate and harass their victims. Remember, you are you own best privacy advocate!

5. Place credit freezes on all 3 credit bureaus: Today, without an identity change, it is often impossible for many to protect their credit and personal information from attack by a vicious high-tech stalker. . Stalkers often will apply for credit using the victim’s name to damage his or her credit rating. If this happens, contact the three national credit bureaus: Equifax, Experian and Trans Union, and place a security freeze upon their credit bureau accounts, Simply ask for their particular policies and procedures to place the freeze upon your credit. This will save you endless hours to repair their your if the stalker attempts to tamper with it. An ounce of prevention is a pound of cure!

And just to add to the list, I offer five more to chew on:

1) Protect your personal information. Social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace have taken the world by storm. Always limit the personal information you put on your profile, pictures and messaging. Even if your profile is set to “private”, there is always a chance that tech-savvy criminals can get to you. Most of these sites have instant messaging capabilities, so there is really no reason to provide any additional contact information.

2) For both social networking sites and general emails, choosing a gender-neutral username can limit the amount of attention you receive. Cute, flirty or sexual usernames can easily draw the attention of a cyber stalker, or give online criminals the impression you are an easy target.

3) Avoid using a work computer or email account for personal use. If a cyber stalker uncovers the IP address used by a business, they can find out where you work.

4) PDA’s, cell phones, computers and email accounts all can be password protected. Locking these devices provides greater security for personal information should they ever fall into criminal hands. It’s also very important to choose passwords that will be difficult to guess or hack.

5) Online banking is another great modern convenience. But as online banking has grown, so have fraudulent websites and internet hacking. Always make sure that your online banking institution is legitimate and insured. The FDIC website has more information on safe online banking.

To sum up, the best protection from internet crime comes from limiting the amount of personal information made available online. High-tech criminals can use anything from uploaded photos to an instant message with a friend to learn about their victim. Like many other innovations, our need for these technologies has flourished. Using these conveniences is perfectly fine so long as we take the right precautions to limit our risk.

Tweet