from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stalking [ ˈstɔːkɪŋ ] describes the willful and repeated (persistent) persecution or harassment of a person whose physical or mental integrity can be threatened and damaged directly, indirectly or in the long term. Stalking is the German Criminal Code as a criminal offense the enactment punished and that in some countries subject criminological and psychological examinations. The term came up in the US and UK in the 1990s and has spread in German-speaking countries, especially in everyday language .


A first scientific definition was made by Zona et al. (1993), who describe stalking as "an obsessive and abnormally long pattern of harassment threat directed against a specific individual". Meloy and Gothard introduced the term 'obsessive pursuit' in 1995 to emphasize the psychiatric aspect. It was also linked to the original meaning in the hunting language.

Pathe and Mullen (1997) see stalking as a “behavioral constellation in which one person repeatedly forces the other to communicate or to get closer”. Westrup (1998) named as characteristics of stalking: "The behavior occurs several times and is aimed at a definable other person, it is perceived as undesirable and borderline violating and can trigger fear and anxiety."

To be categorized as stalking victims, at least two different, the privacy -violating ( intrusive ) behaviors are reported, which had to continue through at least eight weeks and cause anxiety.

The official preventive police definition in Germany is:

"The intentional and repeated persecution and harassment of a person, so that his safety is threatened and his life is seriously impaired."

Cyberstalking or cyber bullying refers to the harassment and persistent stalking of a person using modern technical aids such as mobile phones or the Internet.

Origin of the word

The English word to stalk means "to hunt, stalk, hunt, walk stiffly, strut" in the hunter's language (from the Gaelic stalc or the noun stalcaire for "hunter", "falconer"). Derived from this: pursue; "Stalking" means in the German language "stalking, pursuing, psychological terror".

Possible acts of stalking

According to a handout for advice to the German Federal Ministry for Family, Seniors, Women and Youth (2005), possible forms of action by stalkers extend to:

default External impact Criminal offenses
Questioning the circle of friends Defamation , for example against the employer Insults and defamation
Telephone calls, SMS, messages on the answering machine, sending of e-mails at all times of the day and night Orders for shipments of goods on behalf of the victim Coercions and threats
"Affirmations of love" such as love letters, flowers, gifts Presence as well as chasing and lurking, for example in front of the apartment, the workplace, the place of purchase

In dramatic cases, the spectrum of so-called stalking behaviors can range from physical violence to killing. It must be pointed out that individual acts do not necessarily have to be classified as criminal, but the number and duration of such acts are regarded as stalking. For example, trying to find a person's telephone number does not necessarily have to be noticed as a disruption as a single act, but in combination with other acts such behavior can be described as stalking. Conversely, a person who occasionally tries to reach a person is not necessarily a stalker. General troublemakers, annoyances or unpleasant people are wrongly referred to as stalkers, although their actions do not necessarily represent persecution. In addition, in the case of a crime such as murder or assault, not every previous attempt to contact you can be considered a sign of stalking.

According to an analysis by the Technical University of Darmstadt in cooperation with the White Ring , physical attacks or physical violence occur in every fifth case. Often, however, it is the more "light" stalking acts, such as making calls on the phone or staying near the victim , which make up the majority of all acts. Depending on the character, resilience and sensitivity of the victim, even these "lighter" forms of stalking can cause psychological and physical reactions in the victim, which increase with the duration of the stalking and can lead to serious illnesses and even develop into incapacity for work.

For obsessive fans of stars, the term Sasaeng ( 사생 ) or Sasaeng Fan has established itself in South Korea and the K-Pop scene . The term means something like "private life". It is a reference to the fact that these fans invade the idols' private lives , comparable to stalkers. This invasion of privacy includes incidents such as going to the stars' homes, installing surveillance cameras, harassing family members, attending private family celebrations, sending inappropriate gifts, and being the idols.

Perpetrator-victim relationship

Like a hunter, a stalker gathers information about his victim in order to catch them. However, it is not only the individual, re-enacting actions of the perpetrator that are important, but in particular the psychological relationship between perpetrator and victim. This is what distinguishes stalking from other actions that restrict a person's self-determination .

Even if everyone can become a victim of stalking and the victim and the perpetrator do not necessarily have to know each other, according to previous knowledge, the most frequently affected persons are those who have ended a relationship or marriage with the perpetrator or who have rejected a relationship request by the perpetrator.

The trigger for the stalking relationship is often a narcissistic hurt . Narcissistic abuse can come from the stalker as well as from the stalked person and causes two completely different stalking scenarios:

  • If the stalker is a narcissist , he probably feels offended by a rejection of his claims to the stalking victim and would now like to force the victim to fulfill his self-related needs through attrition.
  • If, on the other hand, the stalking victim is a narcissist, they have probably tried to provide the later stalker with an inadequate declaration of separation or a reason for rejection, which repeatedly prompts the (non-narcissistic) stalker to desperately look for explanations for the separation. Breaking off a relationship in denial of a clarifying closing process that would lead to a healthy understanding of why the relationship failed is then nothing more than the continuation of narcissistic abuse during the relationship. In this case, the stalker is perfidious perpetrator (in the criminal sense) and victim at the same time (in the sense of narcissistic abuse by his former partner or potential lover, from which he cannot free himself and, according to the intent of the abusing partner or lover, even beyond the separation should not liberate).
  • It goes without saying that both perpetrators and victims can narcissistically abuse each other.

But work colleagues and neighbors are also often among the victims.

Furthermore, members of professional groups with customer traffic, patients or clients can become victims of a stalker if the stalker sees himself as a victim of advice, treatment, legal dispute or the like. In some cases, however, patients or clients also become victims of stalking from a member of the professional group providing them; for example out of a maddened love. The underlying dependency and trust relationship has a particularly fatal effect. Furthermore, competitors in a special division or rivals who cannot cope with a defeat can become stalkers. Even if the phenomenon of stalking was first noticed by celebrities, they do not seem to constitute the majority of victims.

In some cases, however, the victim is not aware of the perpetrator and does not belong to the immediate personal, professional or living environment. In some cases, the phenomenon of transference plays a role when a perpetrator makes a victim atone for perceived emotional or physical injuries because it has certain characteristics that are related to his own fate. Some of the perpetrators show significant mental illnesses, although stalking itself is not a recognized clinical picture.

Over 90% of the victims of stalking who seek help from the police or other agencies are women and around 85% of the perpetrators are men. 91% of female victims are stalked by men and 56% of male victims by women. The remaining cases are same-sex stalking. According to a study commissioned by the United States Department of Justice , 8% of American women and 2% of men have been stalked by a stalker at some point in their life.

When interpreting these figures, however, the difficulties of empirically recording the crime must be taken into account. In addition to the lack of a uniform definition of the term stalking, experience has shown that it is difficult for those involved in so-called relationship acts to express themselves openly about them.

Psychological classification of the perpetrators

The Australian scientists Mullen, Pathe and Purcell divide the stalkers into six groups based on their motivation and relationship:

group motivation Relationship
1 Rejected stalkers Feelings of humiliation, rejection among others mostly ex-partners / friends
2 Relationship seekers stalkers Misperceptions of the victim's willingness to relate, often delusional Personal and wider environment of the victim
3 Intellectually retarded stalkers Insufficient social skills, crossing borders Personal and wider environment ( neighborhood )
4th Vengeful stalkers because of their disturbed personality, mistakenly see themselves as victims or imagine they are victims of the people they are chasing after; Help they get is used for continued revenge and satisfaction. Temporary environment (e.g. doctor or lawyer as the victim, everyone around the victim)
5 Erotomaniac, morbid, morbid stalker Control / Dominance - mostly psychopathic personality Personal and wider environment ( neighborhood )
6th Sadistic stalkers Feeling of satisfaction Personal and wider environment

Health and social consequences

The majority of the victims suffer from vegetative phenomena, such as restlessness ( fearfulness ), headaches , anxiety symptoms , sleep disorders and stomach complaints and the resulting mental and physical exhaustion. Many are irritated quickly and then react aggressively, depending on the situation, for no reason. A significant number of the victims suffer from depressive moods, some of them from depression . However, it is uncertain to what extent people with mental health problems may already perceive perfectly normal behavior as stalking.

Particularly in the case of victims who are ambushed or who are physically persecuted, patterns of behavior that tend to be reactive, such as avoidance behavior, isolation (isolation) or control behavior, quickly become apparent. Just as the perpetrator is fixated on his victim, the victim is fixated on the stalker by the situation, which is perceived as annoying and an unpredictable threat.

After long and intensive persecution, post-traumatic stress disorder can occur in rare cases , comparable to trauma in soldiers after inhuman war experiences that they could not deal with psychologically.

In order to be able to counteract the health and social consequences of stalking in a targeted manner, it is advisable to seek help early on.

On April 23, 2008 the first advice center for stalkers opened in Berlin.

Case numbers


For 2007, the police crime statistics for Germany recorded 11,401 cases with the charge of “persistent stalking” according to Section 238 of the  StGB (old version), taking into account that the law did not come into force until March 31, 2007. This corresponds to a frequency of 13.9 cases / 100,000 inhabitants. Firearms were carried in 14 cases, four of which were fired. The clearance rate is 88.4%, i. H. 9389 recorded cases could be resolved. Non-German suspects have a share of 16.6%. In the early to mid-2010s, around 20,000 to 25,000 criminal complaints against stalkers were filed in the courts each year, but most of them failed. To a large extent, stalking was still considered a minor offense. The number of convictions was around 1 percent. For example, there were around 350 convictions in 2011 and 236 in 2013. Stalking was only punished if the perpetrator thereby "seriously impaired" the victim's "life style". B. only applied if the victim was forced to change place of residence and job. Bianca Biwer , the federal manager of the victim protection organization “ Weißer Ring ”, criticized that the criminal liability of stalking “does not depend on the actual impairment of the victim, but solely on how the victim tries to escape”. Another preventive situation was often that the victims neglected to under any circumstances respond to the stalker. For example, a phone call made with the perpetrator out of fear was interpreted to mean that the victim obviously wanted contact after all. As a way out of this misery, the Federal Cabinet decided on July 13, 2016 a draft law by Justice Minister Heiko Maas , which should better protect stalking victims in the future and with which offenders can be convicted of stalking more easily. For the resulting law of March 10, 2017, see Germany - Criminal Law Sanctions }


In 2008 the University of Vienna carried out a study (Stieger, Burger, Schild, 2008) in which 11% of the participants could be identified as victims of stalking in the course of their lives. Further results of the study: The stalking victims consisted mainly of women (86%), but the stalkers were men (81%). Most women were stalked by men (88%). Men, on the other hand, were stalked almost equally by men and women (60% male stalkers). 19% of the victims of stalking stated that they were still being stalked at the time of the study, which corresponds to a point prevalence rate of 2%. 70% of the stalking victims knew the perpetrator, who was a former intimate partner in 40% of the cases, a friend or acquaintance in 23% and a colleague in 13%. As a result of the stalking, 72% of victims said they had changed their lifestyle. 52% of all stalking victims had values ​​in the pathological range with regard to their psychological well-being. When comparing the number of stalking incidents in rural and urban areas, there were no significant differences.

United States

According to the United States Department of Justice , 1,006,970 women and 370,990 men are stalked annually. 77% of female and 64% of male victims know their stalker. 87% of stalkers are men and 78% of victims are women.

Legal Aspects


Criminal sanctions

Legal situation since March 2007

With the law of March 22, 2007, which came into force on March 31, 2007, the criminal offense of "stalking" was introduced into the German Criminal Code ( Section 238 of the Criminal Code, old version), the English term "stalking" was not mentioned in the law. Many behaviors typical for stalking have already been sanctioned by other criminal offenses (threats, trespassing, damage to property, bodily harm, insulting), but the newly created criminal offense of stalking was supposed to guarantee even more effective victim protection by closing existing loopholes. Previously, reenactments below the intervention threshold of one of the criminal offenses mentioned could only be countered by involving the civil courts. In the opinion of the legislature, numbers 1 to 4 of the first paragraph should cover the most frequent acts of re-enactment according to the state of knowledge at the time. With the “other comparable act” according to number 5, a catch-all offense was also integrated in order to avoid gaps in criminal liability and to be able to take future technical developments into account. The term “serious impairment of the way of life” encompasses serious, serious and serious consequences that go beyond the average, regularly acceptable and reasonable modifications of the way of life, significantly and objectively. Higher penalties apply if the perpetrator has put the victim, a family member of the victim or another person close to the victim at risk of death or serious damage to health, or if the act caused the death of one of the named persons. (Paragraphs 2 and 3) In the latter cases, due to § 112a Paragraph 1 No. 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was amended at the same time, corresponding criminal offenses apply as grounds for detention due to the risk of repetition . Simple stalking will only be pursued upon request (paragraph 5), unless the public prosecutor's office assumes a particular public interest in the specific case . But even in the presence of a request the prosecutor pursued the deed so far only when they affirmed the public interest ( § 376 Code of Criminal Procedure, with the possibility of co-plaintiff , § 395  paragraph 1 No. 1 lit e Code of Criminal Procedure), otherwise the victims were in the way of private prosecution referenced (Section 374 (1) No. 5 StPO, old version). A simple stalking is punishable by imprisonment of up to three years or a fine .

Legal situation since March 2017

With the new law to improve protection against stalking of March 1, 2017, the 1st paragraph of § 238  StGB (with unchanged paragraphs 2–5), as well as § 374 paragraph 1 No. 5  StPO and other paragraphs in connection with the Violence Protection Act , changed. The newly formulated basic offense according to Section 238 (1) StGB has no longer been designed as a successful offense , but as a suitability offense since March 10, 2017 . This means that from now on the perpetrator can not only be punished if he has caused a serious impairment of the way of life through unauthorized re-enactment in the form of persistent execution of explicitly listed offenses, it is now sufficient that the actions lead to such impairment were suitable. The parallel amendment to Section 374 (1) No. 5 means that the offense of “stalking” (Section 238 (1) of the Criminal Code) can no longer be prosecuted by the injured party by way of a private lawsuit without first calling the public prosecutor. In this way, the victims should no longer be able to be referred to the private lawsuit and more criminal offenses should be reported.

Victims Compensation Act

Stalking does not automatically establish a right to compensation under the Victims Compensation Act (OEG). Non-violent, in particular psychological effects on the victim are regularly not to be assessed as “physical attacks” which the OEG requires for a claim for compensation. In April 2011, the Federal Social Court decided that victim compensation can only be considered if the victim's body was exposed to violence as part of the stalking.

Preventive action

Victims of stalking initially have the option of calling in the police. This can expel the troublemaker from the apartment as well as issue a dismissal against him ; Furthermore, a ban on contact can be issued ( police and regulatory general clause ). Within i. a. ten days the injured should the competent local district court obtain protection orders against Stalker, which based on the Violence Protection Act may be adopted (GewSchG) and may consist of the arrangement, for example, not to approach the victim's home. An example from the higher court rulings is the decision of the Higher Regional Court Brandenburg of October 2, 2007. According to this, it is sufficient for an order according to the GewSchG if the victim is prevented from leaving the apartment for a period of about ten minutes.

Insofar as an injunction against a stalker is issued on the basis of the Violence Protection Act and the stalker violates the prohibitions set out in the injunction, this violation constitutes a punishable behavior under Section 4 Violence Protection Act . Strictly speaking, this is not the criminal liability of stalking per se but rather about criminal liability for disregarding a court order. The courts took action against telephone terror as early as the 1970s.

In Germany, offenders can be held in pre- trial detention (so-called de-escalation detention) under the condition of Section 112a StPO ( detention risk of repetition ). However, this only applies under two conditions: First, there must be a strong suspicion that the perpetrator has put his victim (or a family member of the victim or another person close to the victim) at least in danger of life or serious damage to health. Secondly, certain facts must justify the risk that the perpetrator will commit further significant criminal offenses of the same type or continue the offense before a final judgment is reached ( Section 112a (1) No. 1 StPO, Section 238 (2) and (3) StGB).

According to the current state of knowledge of the police work, the so-called "threat approach" seems to prove itself against the alleged perpetrator. According to the evaluation of several studies, including the Darmstadt study, a state reaction within the first 48 hours leaves a lasting and 80% terminating effect on the perpetrator, since his actions are taken out of anonymity and the legal and actual limits of his actions be shown and threatened. These are often not known to the perpetrator, who in many cases sees himself in the role of victim, or not to this extent.

However, it is also possible that addressing the threat to the victim increases the current risk to the victim, since it is now apparent to the stalker that the victim has called in government agencies . It is therefore important to continue to observe the stalker after the address or to accompany him by involving other advice centers. The addressing of the perpetrator itself offers the police officer in particular, who has to carry out a risk assessment, the opportunity to gain further information about the perpetrator (state of mind, motivation) and to structure further procedures. In particular, the victim is to be informed about the addressing of the threat.

Civil Sanctions

Victims of stalking attacks can also defend themselves under civil law . If the attacks are likely to violate their personal rights, claims for injunctive relief , information and damages according to § 823 , § 1004 BGB , Art. 1 and Art. 2 GG come into consideration. Depending on the intensity of the re-enactment, the courts also grant considerable amounts of compensation for pain and suffering .

Labor law sanctions

If an employee feels harassed by a work colleague and states that neither business nor private contact is desired, the employee must respect this. If he or she continues to act against the declared will of the work colleague, this behavior can justify an extraordinary, behavior-related termination of the employment relationship . Whether a warning is required beforehand depends on the circumstances of the individual case.


The problem of "stalking" was only slowly becoming apparent in the courts , prosecutors and the police . Often victims were not taken seriously. On the other hand, the police and the public prosecutor's office were often limited in their scope of action due to the lack of a legal basis.

In response to this perceived unsatisfactory situation in August 2005, the adopted Federal Cabinet a draft law , which provided for a new § 241b of the Criminal Code.

The need for such a law was controversial in 2005, as it was felt that the existing laws would give those concerned ample opportunities to prosecute. Rather, the existing options under criminal, civil and police law should be applied more consistently. In addition, concrete criticism was made of the draft law presented, for example with regard to constitutional conformity due to the large number of indefinite legal terms . The bill to § 241b of the Criminal Code coincided with the premature end of the Bundestag of discontinuity prey.

The § 238 of the Criminal Code was introduced in 2006 as a draft in the Bundestag. It was passed in the Bundestag at the end of 2006 and in the Bundesrat in February 2007 and entered into force on March 31, 2007.

Since March 10, 2017, the regulation is no longer designed as a successful offense , but as a suitability offense: The offender can therefore not only be punished if he has caused a serious impairment of life through unauthorized re-enactment, it is now sufficient for the actions to be taken were suitable for such impairment.


In Austria, since July 1, 2006, stalking has been punishable by the introduction of persistent prosecution as a criminal offense, Section 107a of the Criminal Code. The sentence is up to one year in prison.

In order to qualify as persistent persecution, the perpetrator must pursue the victim in a way that is objectively capable of unreasonably affecting his or her lifestyle. The Criminal Code lists personal contact, contact via telecommunications or other means of communication or by third parties as acts of stalking. The transfer of personal data is also an offense within the meaning of Section 107a of the Criminal Code, if goods or services are ordered in the name of the victim or if third parties are induced to contact the victim.

It is necessary that at least one of the acts listed is continued for a longer period of time and that the act was committed after July 1, 2006. The offenses of § 107a StGB are official offenses , which means that the public prosecutor's office has to take action regardless of the consent of the victim.

To protect against further encroachments on privacy, civil law, at the request of the victim, can prohibit the stalker from making contact with the victim, following him, staying in certain places or goods by means of an injunction to order for the victim. This ruling is valid for a maximum of one year and is partially enforced by the police as well as by fines or imprisonment (execution application to the district court).


There is no separate criminal offense for stalking in Switzerland. Behind this is the conviction that nobody should be restricted in their freedom of movement just because someone else feels vaguely harassed. According to this view, such an indefinite fact would hardly be compatible with the requirement of certainty (nulla poena sine lege certa) .

If there is deliberate harassment, there is the possibility of obtaining a removal order under civil law. This prohibits someone under threat of punishment from approaching the complainant, staying in a certain area or making contact with the person in any way ( Art. 28b ZGB, protection of personality against violence, threats or stalking ). This option has always existed, but the article was tightened on July 1, 2007. Disregarding such an order is a criminal offense ( Art. 292 StGB, disobedience to official orders ). In this way, stalking can be prosecuted without violating the requirement of certainty or breaking the principle of subsidiarity, according to which criminal law should only be used as a last resort.

A stalker can of course be directly prosecuted if he commits a crime. In connection with stalking, for example, coercion or misuse of a telecommunications system .

See also


motion pictures
radio play



Literature about stalking catalog of the DNB

Non-fiction books, articles

  • R. MacKenzie, T. McEwan, M. Pathé, D. James, J. Ogloff, P. Mullen: Stalking. A guide to risk assessment for stalkers - the “Stalking Risk Profile”. German translation and introduction to aspects specific to Germany by H. Dreßing, M. Bumb and K. Whittaker, Kohlhammer Verlag, 2015, ISBN 978-3-17-023063-7 .
  • Julia Bettermann: fake stalking victims? False victim syndrome in cases of stalking. Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft, 2005, ISBN 978-3-935979-62-7 (Reviewed by Sönke Gerhold. In: Neue Kriminalpolitik, 2006, pp. 117–119).
  • Julia Bettermann, Moetje Feenders: Stalking, Possibilities and Limits of Intervention. Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft, 2004, ISBN 3-935979-36-3 (reviewed by Sönke Gerhold in: Neue Kriminalpolitik, 2006, pp. 117–119).
  • Sebastian Buß: The way to a German stalking crime - § 238 StGB. Publishing house Dr. Kovac, Hamburg 2008, ISBN 978-3-8300-4008-8 .
  • Petra Drawe, Heike Oetken: Stalking. A challenge for social work. Lang, Frankfurt am Main 2005, ISBN 3-631-53900-2 .
  • Harald Dreßing, Peter Gass: Stalking! Verlag Hans Huber, 2005, ISBN 3-456-84196-5 .
  • Sandra Fiebig: Stalking. Background and options for intervention. Tectum Verlag, 2005, ISBN 3-8288-8876-3 .
  • Peter Fiedler: Stalking. Victims, perpetrators, prevention, treatment. Beltz Psychologie Verlags Union, 2006, ISBN 3-621-27588-6 .
  • Nikolaos Gazeas: The stalking offense - § 238 StGB (stalking). In: Juristische Rundschau (JR) . Vol. 2007, no. 12, pp. 497-505.
  • Sönke Gerhold : The new stalking fact; a first overview. In: Neue Kriminalpolitik, 2007, pp. 2–4. JSTOR 43263304
  • Sönke Gerhold: The system of victim protection in the area of ​​cyber and internet stalking - legal reaction options for those affected. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2010, ISBN 978-3-8329-5341-6 .
  • Joachim Herrmann: The Development of Victim Protection in German Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Law. In: Journal for International Criminal Law Doctrine (ZIS) 2010, 430 (PDF file; 141 kB).
  • Jens Hoffmann , Hans-Georg W. Voss (ed.): Psychology of stalking. Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft, Frankfurt am Main 2005, ISBN 3-935979-54-1 .
  • Jens Hoffmann: Stalking . Springer Medizin Verlag, Heidelberg 2006, ISBN 3-540-25457-9 .
  • Rasso Knoller: Stalking. When love turns mad Schwarzkopf & Schwarzkopf, Berlin 2005, ISBN 3-89602-675-5 .
  • Wolf Ortiz-Müller (Ed.): Stalking - Das Praxishandbuch. Victim support, perpetrator intervention, law enforcement. Kohlhammer Verlag, 2017, ISBN 978-3-17-030279-2 .
  • Volkmar von Pechstaedt: Legal protection against stalking: Legal bases and problems. Hainholz Verlag, Göttingen 2004, ISBN 3-932622-97-9 .
  • Stephan Rusch. Stalking in Germany - A manual for all areas of practice. Hainholz, Göttingen 2005, ISBN 3-932622-81-2 .
  • Stephan Rusch. “Stalking” - guidelines for basic and advanced training in all areas of practice. NR-Verlag, Bremen 2007, ISBN 3-939564-02-8 .
  • Susanne Schumacher: Stalking. Loved, persecuted, harried. Hainholz, 2004, ISBN 3-932622-89-8 .
  • Andreas Seling: § 107a StGB. A law against stalking. At the same time: Salzburg, Univ., Diploma thesis, 2006. NWV, Neuer Wissenschafts-Verlag, Vienna / Graz 2006, ISBN 978-3-7083-0416-8 (=  new legal monographs; vol. 36).
  • Stefan Stieger; Christoph Burger, Anne Schild: Lifetime prevalence and impact of stalking: Epidemiological data from Eastern Austria. In: European Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 22, No. 4. Zaragoza (ES) 2008, ISSN  0213-6163 , pp. 235–241 ( PDF ).
  • Sascha Vander: Stalking - Current developments and tendencies to create a special criminal offense. In: Critical quarterly for legislation and jurisprudence (KritV). Vol. 89, 2006, ISSN  0179-2830 , pp. 81-99.
  • Orlando Vanoli: Stalking - A "new" phenomenon and its criminal record in California and Switzerland. Schulthess Legal Media, Zurich 2009, ISBN 978-3-7255-5814-8 .
  • Hans-Georg W. Voss, Jens Hoffmann, Isabel Wondrak: Stalking in Germany from the perspective of those affected and persecutors. Ed .: Weißer Ring - non-profit association for the support of crime victims and for the prevention of criminal offenses e. V. Nomos, Baden-Baden 2006, ISBN 3-8329-1752-7 (=  Mainz writings on the situation of crime victims; vol. 40).
  • Bernhard Weiner, Ute Ingrid Haas: Victim rights in stalking, violent and sexual crimes - exercising rights, finding help. dtv, 2009, ISBN 978-3-423-50664-9 .
  • Andrea Weiß, Heidi Winterer: Stalking and domestic violence. 2nd Edition. Lambertus-Verlag, 2008, ISBN 3-7841-1778-3 (reviewed by Sönke Gerhold in: Neue Kriminalpolitik, 2009, pp. 36-40).
  • Jan Wendt: The privileges of the media and the criminal offense against stalking . Publishing house Dr. Kovac, Hamburg 2010, ISBN 978-3-8300-5088-9 .
  • Finn Zwißler: Violence Protection Act. How to successfully defend yourself against coercion, stalking and bullying. Walhalla-Fachverlag, Regensburg / Berlin 2006, ISBN 3-8029-3793-7 .

Novels and short stories

Web links

Wiktionary: Stalking  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. Mirjam Utsch: Criminal law problems of stalking . LIT Verlag , 2007, ISBN 978-3-8258-0341-4 , pp. 3 . ( limited preview in Google Book search)
  2. ^ MA Zona, KK Sharma, JC Lane: A comparative study of erotomanic and obsessional subjects in a forensic sample. In: Journal of Forensic Sciences . No. 38 (4) , 1993, pp. 894-903 .
  3. ^ JR Meloy, S. Gothard: Demographic and clinical comparison of obsessional followers and offenders with mental disorders. In: The American journal of psychiatry. Volume 152, Number 2, February 1995, pp. 258-263, doi: 10.1176 / ajp.152.2.258 , PMID 7840361 .
  4. ^ M. Pathé, PE Mullen: The impact of stalkers on their victims. In: The British journal of psychiatry: the journal of mental science. Volume 170, January 1997, pp. 12-17, PMID 9068768 .
  5. What is stalking? ( Memento of May 13, 2007 in the Internet Archive ). Accessed December 28, 2010.
  6. Cyber ​​Bulling
  7. Materials on gender equality policy: Stalking: Unlimited Harassment (PDF file; 254 kB) from the Federal Ministry for Families, Seniors, Women and Youth
  8. Sam Lansky: Hallyu Tsunami: The Unstoppable (and Terrifying) Rise of K-Pop Fandom. In: Grantland. September 10, 2012, accessed April 30, 2019 .
  9. J. Williams, Samantha Xiang Xin Ho: “Sasaengpaen” or K-pop fan? Singapore Youths, Authentic Identities, and Asian Media Fandom . In: Deviant Behavior . 2015, p. 1–14 , doi : 10.1080 / 01639625.2014.983011 .
  10. Elizabeth Soh: 'Sasaeng Stalkers' (Part 1): K-pop fans turn to blood, poison for attention. In: Yahoo . August 2, 2012, accessed April 30, 2019 .
  11. Someone who is capable of leaving you without a real heart to heart talk lacks empathy and is manipulative. Some people, most often those with Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Narcissistic traits, purposely leave relationships denying their partners the decency and respect of closure. Why? It boils down to one thing and one thing only: Control. See Closing the Door On Closure.
  12. Bree Bonchay: I am Free. Healing stories about surviving toxic relationships with narcissists and sociopaths. 2016.
  13. Christine Merzeder: How creeping poison, narcissistic abuse in relationships survive and heal. 2015.
  14. ^ Joachim Burgheim: Stalking - explanatory approaches and new research results. In: Die Kriminalpolizei , 2, 2007.
  15. ^ A b Patricia Tjaden, Nancy Thoennes: Stalking in America: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. US Department of Justice. 2008, NCJ 169592. p. 2: “ 8 percent of women and 2 percent of men in the United States have been stalked at some time in their life; an estimated 1,006,970 women and 370,990 men are stalked annually. Although stalking is a gender-neutral crime, most (78 percent) stalking victims are female and most (87 percent) stalking perpetrators are male.
  16. Source: PE Mullen, M. Pathé, Purcell: Stalkers and their victims. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2000.
  17. ^ Berlin: First stalker advice center opened. In: Die Welt , April 23, 2008, accessed June 18, 2017.
  18. Police crime statistics - basic table - 1987–2013 ( Memento of the original from September 18, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Federal Criminal Police Office, 2. 2014, PDF (1 MB) p. 46, accessed 18. 2017. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot /
  19. Annelie Kaufmann: Harassment: The new suffering of the stalking victims. In: Zeit Online , February 3, 2014, accessed June 18, 2017.
  20. Parvin Sadigh: Stalking Paragraph: Stalking is still considered a minor offense. In: Zeit Online , December 14, 2014, accessed June 18, 2017.
  21. Rita Lauter, Sybille Klormann: Stalking: agony and alone. In: Zeit Online , July 13, 2016, accessed June 18, 2017.
  22. Cabinet resolves better protection against stalking. In: FamRZ , July 13, 2016, accessed June 18, 2017.
  23. Christoph Burger, Anne Schild, Stefan Stieger: Lifetime prevalence and impact of stalking: Epidemiological data from Eastern Austria ( English ) In: . ICP2008. July 21, 2008. Retrieved June 7, 2020.
  24. Stefan Stieger, Burger Christoph, Anne Schild: Lifetime prevalence and impact of stalking: Epidemiological data from Eastern Austria ( English , PDF; 51 kB) In: Eur. J. Psychiat. Vol. 22, N. ° 4, (235-241) . October 14, 2008. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  25. Law to improve protection against stalking of March 1, 2017 ( Federal Law Gazette I p. 386 ).
  26. BSG, judgment of April 7, 2011, Az. B 9 VG 2/10 R, full text.
  27. ^ Higher Regional Court of Brandenburg, decision of October 2, 2007, Az. 9 UF 137/07
  28. Cologne Higher Regional Court, 15 U 62/11 , on
  29. ^ BAG, judgment of April 19, 2012 , Az. 2 AZR 258/11, press release.
  30. ^ "Draft of a law on the criminal liability of persistent stalking" ( Memento of December 26, 2005 in the Internet Archive )
  31. a b Online security / stalking and cyberstalking , on