I was living there while this was going on

This is a running commentary on the film below.

Apparently, this film is based on a true story. I was living there while this was going on, but I’ve only just started watching this film so I can’t say any more yet at this point. It does not look like the film was shot in St Pete. No Spanish moss, for example. And nothing that I recognise.

A few minutes later: No, the movie came out while I was living there. It all happened earlier:
https://www.tampabay.com/archive/1993/10/14/family-s-terror-comes-to-nbc/

Another stark reminder – to wake up from their silly daydreams – for people including way too many cops who are convinced that being stalked is flattering and romantic.

The problem with doing things like barring someone – in this case from the junior softball activities – and from getting protection orders is that it can make a stalker so furious that it encourages (that is, motivates) him and escalates the situation. It rarely stops serious stalking. It often stops stalkers who aren’t really stalkers.

There is no “one size fits all” approach that you can execute without professional assistance and going to the police to report stalking is a complete waste of time in many countries.

I assume that this Curtis was autistic and on the one hand overflowing with his own emotions but on the other hand unable to grasp how his actions were affecting others. Autistic people can have limited Theory of Mind (mentioned in my previous post), which makes them look like they have no empathy at all, but unlike with psychopaths – who genuinely do not care – autistic people do care.

And they are capable of learning and understanding and can be motivated to adapt some of the behaviours that may be causing severe concern for others. If only there were enough people who are capable of serving as interpreters in such a context and are willing to do that.

But I am only 20 minutes into the film at this point.

So how could you resolve a situation like this peacefully and perhaps even prevent it? By making sure that the healthcare gap between mental health versus physical health is addressed and that people like this Curt have good support that helps them understand how the rest of the world works? That’s generally speaking.

How did the stalking begin?

Because the girl who was stalked, who was 14 when it started, was the only child who did not tease the ADULT who ended up stalking her and terrorising her family. When the film came out, five years after the stalking began, the girl was still in hiding.

But later on, he does seem to become deliberately mean. That is not a sign of autism. Or is it? That’s an issue that I too have been grappling with. What exactly is autism? Could all of what I am exposed to be autism and anger in response to the world and to me not wanting this guy to go into my flat when I am out and all of that? Or is it something else and if so, what?

Almost no data on this:
https://www.reading.ac.uk/news-and-events/releases/PR842864.aspx

https://ibcces.org/blog/2017/04/26/stalking/

https://www.autismparentingmagazine.com/harassment-reduce-situations-people-autism/

http://www.theneurotypical.com/an-open-letter-to-high-functioning-autism-experts.html

The problem is – for me too – that none us know how to deal with stalking behaviours and often are being made to feel that we need to be nice to the person in order to get him to behave appropriately and stop him from getting angry and do damage. But that often encourages the person. Telling him “no”, however, doesn’t work either and can make him very angry.

(I didn’t even know the guy who started stalking me. I thought someone else was doing this, which was someone I couldn’t really claim to know either.)

Watch the bit between about 31:00 and 36:00 in the film and you have all the agony and disruption and dilemmas and frustration associated with being stalked.

It starts with the friend who makes fun of the girl, knowing fully well that this girl just threw up that afternoon after her stalker turned out to be sitting a few rows behind her at a sports game, to the young family members making fun of the situation, the disruption by the stalker the following morning and the resulting frustration and anger, the anger that comes back from the stalker, and then the legal situation and the utter lack of understanding on the side of the stalker and the dilemma the parents face between wanting to ignore the guy and pretend he does not exist and also not wanting to make him angry. (The only bit that is missing in this fragment is the role that cops play.)

The “I hear! I hear!” response in that bit of film makes me suspect autism again. His response seems literal. Just like his “You can’t do that! The law does not allow that!” about Linda threatening to spray-paint his car purple and orange is a bit unusual.

I looked after someone with Alzheimer’s, a Canadian woman who got stranded in St Pete, for a few days in 1995 and that taught me a lot.

One thing I do know is that I do not have the patience to deal with autistic people around the clock, in the fringes. Because it’s a full-time job.

I have never had any relatives, colleagues, acquaintances etc who are autistic, to my knowledge, but the impression I get is that they’d likely quickly drive me nuts. I can’t be the only one who feels that way in spite of having enough compassion.

(The family portrayed in the film has said that the film is pretty accurate. Only the daughter’s bleeding lip at some point was different and one other bit, apparently.)

Btw, this stalker character in the film has the same weird situationally inappropriate smile as my hacker.

Yeah, this dude is as “nuts” as my stalker. Whether he is autistic or not, I don’t know. But the driving in circles in front of the Anellos’ home – at 45:00 – is exactly the kind of thing that my stalker does too and I don’t know if this is autistic behaviour. It comes across as taunting. Is it “lack of impulse control”? Yeah, maybe that too is related to autism. The frustration with being told “no”, the fact that he just does not get it, it causes a tremendous amount of conflict in him. it is “I want!” and everything and everyone else is of no importance relative to what he wants.

According to the stalker’s mother, he had “emotional problems and a severe learning disability”.

So how do you get someone to move on without being able either to “take yourself out of the equation” as one stalking target put it – and yes, she meant suicide – or relocating as far away as possible and start living under a fake name?

How do you get someone – a complete or relative stranger – to give you your life back? Once stalking’s already progressed big time, taking yourself out of the equation is often the only way left to put a stop to it. Being stalked.

That is just not good enough.

We – as society – can do better, surely.

Am at 58 minutes into the film now. So are stalkers like this one likely to be autistic? If he is indeed a so-called predatory stalker – one of the comments mentions that phrase – then no. But those people are more likely to be fooling the people around them, as follows.

From: https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/the-human-equation/201212/the-predatory-stalker

Okay, at the end of the film I conclude that this Bruce Andrew Raines was is autistic (and so was his mother, apparently, as they’ve both been described as “weird”; he learned his social skills from his mother to a large degree, of course). There was no intent to hurt the girl. Ever. Not even in the film. Just him not getting – understanding – a lot of stuff and getting very frustrated over it.

In those days, nobody ever talked about autism. I am not sure that the word even existed back then. In Florida, you could have people locked up for, well, disagreeing with you. There was a mental health act – the Baker Act – that was often abused. Mom does not want to include you in the inheritance? Just convince the court that she’s crazy. Dad wants to go on a holiday and also do things like learn how to paint instead of stay put in his old folks’ home and play shuffleboard all day? Can’t have that either. Journalists raised attention for the problem and the law was subsequently amended. In 1996, I think that was.

And my hacker is very likely autistic too. His logic is weird and he does not get things the way others do. It is why he thinks that my siblings are bad people – and various other people – and does not want me to be in contact with any of them.

So how do you handle such a situation in real life? When it begins. By sitting down with him, quietly, in a quiet room, not in a hostile atmosphere, with an intermediary and quietly and patiently explaining the WHY to him and finding a different focus for him. Also explaining to the parents and to the girl and to others what is going on.

And not focusing on only such negative aspects of autism but also pointing out the positives of autism.

Watching this film was not always easy for me. I feel that that person leaving notes everywhere is me too these days, because it is often the only way to communicate with English people with their bizarre host of aversions, assumptions and insecurities (not to mention their tendencies for unbridled aggression and whatnot). I find dealing with English people often very exhausting. Frustrating. Complicated. All that convoluted Victorian stuff. All those rules and their upset when you don’t follow their rules. All that avoidance of eye contact. All that shyness. Alternatively, all that crazy bluster to hide their social insecurities. I may have to do some thinking about that… (such as about how I can approach this in a more effective manner).

 

 

Something you may want to watch

It may also shatter your illusions, however, if you still believe that police are the good ones, the ones (that you pay for through your council tax, in Britain) to help keep you safe and secure and protect your basic rights.

This morning, this caught my eye:

(Scottish) Police Pause Rollout Of Device That Hacks Into Phones After Fears ‘It Is Unlawful’

I suspect that police in England and Wales already are using these “kiosks” that hack into people’s phones and laptops, overriding passwords.

I am sure it can be great fun for some officers to play with these “kiosks”. You can almost hear them talk. “I knew it! She’s a lesbian!” and “Does he really think he stands a chance with that woman?” and “Oh my god! Trying to lose weight? Fat chance!”

Yep, very useful.</end of sarcasm>

We need an alternative to police. Because going to or contacting the police has become one of the worst things to do in almost any situation. (Unless your insurance company wants a copy of a report after a burglary or theft, but leave it at that and do not ask police to do anything else other than give you a copy of the report.) How it got to this point? It’s immaterial. It’s what we have in the here and the now.

As Michael Doherty (a former aircraft engineer who made the mistake of reporting something to police and expecting police to follow up on it) says in the video below, you do have the right to investigate on your own, to try to detect and stop crime on your own. If your investigation is successful, you can also prosecute on your own. (I am talking about England and Wales.)

But before you choose this path, as I have stated several times before, look into the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 because police and others can use this against you, assuming that you are unaware of 1(3)(a), which most people probably are. That means that, before you know it, you can already have confessed to a crime that you didn’t actually commit. To prevent this, you need to know what the law says.

I repeat and highlight:

(3) Subsection (1) [F4 or (1A)] does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows—

(a) that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,

(b) that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or

(c) that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable.

(Whether it says “and” or “or” makes a difference. It means that each of these conditions on its own applies, that they do not have to apply all at once.)

The video below dates back to 2015, is rather academic and particularly in the beginning lacks a logical thread, in my opinion, but does contain useful information.

You may want to read this as well:
The Human Rights Act Can Transform Lives Without Going To Court

(Also, if you want to protect yourself from police with a camera, you need to have one that does not have wifi or bluetooth.)

It is possible to resolve many situations or at least make them somewhat liveable without going to police, and much more successfully and/or peacefully. If you try this after you’ve been to police, however, police officers are likely to hold it against you. (This is mean because most people who contacted the police in the past decade will have been told that police wouldn’t investigate and would do nothing with what they told the police owing to a lack of resources and/or will have been referred to their GP and the local civic offices.)

Unfortunately, most of us learn these things the hard way – and you can’t undo having contacted the police.