Question about harassment

Cheeky_Monkey

IMO, this whole thing is pathetic.

Do people really think that the Police have got nothing better to do than protect some girl from her own lies, deceit and sexual promiscuity?

Personally, I would prefer it if they spent their time trying to catch murderers and terrorists!

JimmyTheWig

marliepanda wrote: »

Telling someone something isn’t harassment. Harassment is harassment. If I tell someone they look fat I know it’s going to upset and distress them, but I’m just being horrible. I’m not harassing them.

If I start a campaign of intimidation, constantly calling them fat via text, email, social media, in the street, THATS harassment.

And even then, I doubt that you'd get arrested for it.

pogofish

Cheeky_Monkey wrote: »

Do people really think that the Police have got nothing better to do than protect some girl from her own lies, deceit and sexual promiscuity?

No, they are trying to protect her from a vindictive and by the sounds of it, highly immature ex, who may not have listened to "take a hike" with any seriousness and seems to think that telling tales to her family (or even just the threat) will help him any. Beyond that, any individual/moral issues in the former relationship are their own business and no one else's.

Also remember that a great many domestic harassment cases start-off sounding really childish and petty when you get down to the individual elements but taken as a whole, it becomes something else and can even escalate into a whole other world of horrible if left to continue unchecked.

Cheeky_Monkey

pogofish wrote: »

No, they are trying to protect her from a vindictive and by the sounds of it, highly immature ex, who may not have listened to "take a hike" with any seriousness and seems to think that telling tales to her family will help him any.

No, the ex has been spoken to by Police and has agreed not to contact her again, which, as far as I can tell, he has stuck to.

The whole thread is about how she can use the Police to stop her family finding out what she is really like and, as the OP says, avoid the embarrassment.

Gavin83

Am I the only one that thinks there a chance the ex hasn't actually done anything wrong?

I think there's as much chance, if not more that the OPs girlfriend is a nightmare and is probably best avoided. If I was the OP I'd be seriously reconsidering my relationship. This isn't even taking into account that it isn't going anywhere anyway, if she can't even tell her family about you that isn't a sign of a relationship that has a future.

pogofish

Gavin83 wrote: »

Am I the only one that thinks there a chance the ex hasn't actually done anything wrong?

Aside from the fact that police nearly always attempt an informal resolution as a first step in cases of nonviolent/nonthreatening harassment, If the police decided to speak to him, under the current legislation, they will have had to be convinced by at least enough evidence of a minimal level of wrongdoing.

But yes if he takes his warning, grows-up, moves-on and does nothing else to cause problems in her life, then yes he probably would be considered to have not done anything wrong in the longer term.

pogofish

Cheeky_Monkey wrote: »

The whole thread is about how she can use the Police to stop her family finding out what she is really like and, as the OP says, avoid the embarrassment.

Except that running to the family/telling tales/trying to out someone or somehow blacken their reputation is a recognised form of harassment/vindictive/coercive behaviour - esp when its clear that other unwanted attempts at contact have been rebuffed.

Its all about context and how the individual incidents might add-up to something more.

I agree that the police can't stop him if that's what he's determined to do but with the other stuff in mind, he should be made aware that he might have to face consequences for it. Although I'm inclined to agree that its more like childish ranting for now.

Gavin83

pogofish wrote: »

Aside from the fact that police nearly always attempt an informal resolution as a first step in cases of nonviolent/nonthreatening harassment, If the police decided to speak to him, under the current legislation, they will have had to be convinced by at least enough evidence of a minimal level of wrongdoing.

Except they don't. There's been a number of people in this thread that have pointed out they'll go with the default position that the 'victim' is in the right and will treat the other party as if they're guilty, even if they aren't. All they've essentially done is ask him to leave her alone, which he has. He hasn't committed a crime.

Let's look at it another way. I'm not sure who broke up with who but from what has been said I assume it was her that broke it off with him. He sent some text messages and a present to try and patch things up, which lets be frank is a normal action a lot of people would take. Instead of asking him to leave her alone she went running straight to the police to 'teach him a lesson' when a simple 'leave me alone' would have done the job. There isn't even any evidence he's planning on telling her brother, it's third party information but even if he did there is nothing wrong in doing so. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable anymore keeping this secret from his friend.

Another interpretation and yes, jumping to conclusions but then again so have the majority of posters on this thread, including yourself.

To answer the OP I agree with the majority of the other posters, there is nothing you can do to stop him telling her brother. I guess this is the disadvantage of keeping secrets and choosing to be a member of a religion that doesn't allow you to live your life how you want.

pogofish

Gavin83 wrote: »

Except they don't. There's been a number of people in this thread that have pointed out they'll go with the default position that the 'victim' is in the right and will treat the other party as if they're guilty, even if they aren't. All they've essentially done is ask him to leave her alone, which he has. He hasn't committed a crime.

IME - Personal and professional, although they can and do happen, the number of instances where police go-in guns-blazing against potential harassers are very small compared to the number of proper, professional responses where the potential harasser is given an informal talking-to and advised to step away - and if they do, that's an end to it but then again, most of my experience involves properly trained and experienced officers and support services. I do agree that not all will be up to that standard.

As for comitting a crime - That's more arguable as in order to even go and speak to someone under the current legislation, the police would need to have enough evidence to bring charges if they had to. Although they could well be at the low-end of the scale when it comes to going to court.

pogofish

Gavin83 wrote: »

Let's look at it another way. I'm not sure who broke up with who but from what has been said I assume it was her that broke it off with him. He sent some text messages and a present to try and patch things up, which lets be frank is a normal action a lot of people would take. Instead of asking him to leave her alone she went running straight to the police to 'teach him a lesson' when a simple 'leave me alone' would have done the job. There isn't even any evidence he's planning on telling her brother, it's third party information but even if he did there is nothing wrong in doing so. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable anymore keeping this secret from his friend.

Most of my dealings over harassment have involved younger people - and yes, believe me, it can be as petty/juvenile as that and still have the potential to end in charges.

Where children are involved it can be very different as there are often a whole lot of other dynamics involved - custody/access in particular.