Stalking in Australia - From Past to Present

S T R U C T U R E

I. Introduction

II. What is stalking?

III. Anti-Stalking Legislation in Australia
1. Queensland
2. New South Wales
3. South Australia
4. Victoria
5. Western Australia
6. Northern Territory
7. Tasmania
8. Australian Capital Territory

IV. Discussion
1. The Fault Element of Stalking
2. Cyberstalking
a) Email Stalking
b) Internet Stalking
c) Computer Stalking

V. Conclusion and Outlook

Appendix

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

illustration not visible in this excerpt

2. Case Law

He Kaw The v The Queen (1985) 157 CLR 523 (HC)

Gunes v Pearson (1996) 89 A Crim R 297 (Vic Sup Ct)

R v Fyduniw [1996] QCA 322 (3 September 1996) (Qld Sup Ct CA), <http://www.austlii.edu. au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/qld/QCA/1996/322.html?query=%22r%22+and+%22v%22+and+ %22fyduniw%22>

R v Allie [1999] 1 Qd R 618 (Qld Sup Ct CA)

R v Hubbuck [1999] 1 Qd R 314 (Qld Sup Ct CA)

Berlyn v Brouskos [2002] VSC 377 (9 September 2002) (Vic Sup Ct), <http://www. austlii.edu.au/cgibin/disp.pl/au/cases/vic/VSC/2002/377.html?query=%7e+stal-king>

3. Legislation

California Penal Code

Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)

Crimes Act 1958 (Vic)

Criminal Code 1899 (Qld)

Criminal Code 1913 (WA)

Criminal Code Act 1924 (Tas)

Criminal Code Act 1924 (Tas)

Criminal Code of the Northern Territory of Australia

Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA)

Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA)

4. Other Sources

Hansard, ACT, 09/08/2001

Hansard, SA Legislative Council, Criminal Law Consolidation (Stalking) Amendment Bill, 16/02/1994

Hansard, SA House of Assembly, Criminal Law Consolidation (Stalking) Amendment Bill, 10/03/1994

Hansard, SA Legislative Council, Statutes Amendment (Stalking) Bill, 26/07/2001

Hansard, SA House of Assembly, Statutes Amendment (Stalking) Bill, 04/10/2001

Hansard, Vic Assembly, Crimes (Stalking and Family Violence) Bill, 10/10/2002

Hansard, Vic Assembly, Crimes (Stalking and Family Violence) Bill, 29/03/2003

Hansard, Victoria Council, Crimes (Stalking) Bill, 19/11/2003

Hansard, Vic Council, Crimes (Stalking) Bill, 02/12/2003

Hansard, WA Legislative Assembly, Criminal Law Amendment Bill (No 1), 25/06/1998

I. Introduction

In 1989, Robert John Bardo, an obsessed fan, killed actress Rebecca Schaeffer near her apartment in Los Angeles, U. S. A. He did so after having stalked her for several months, writing numerous letters and travelling from Tucson, Arizona, to Los Angeles, California, three times in attempts to speak with her^[1].

Soon afterwards, five Californian women were harassed and killed by their ex-intimates against whom they had obtained restraining orders^[2].

In both the celebrity stalking case and the domestic violence cases, the police were unable to intervene since the men – until the time of the killings – had not offended any criminal law. Aware of this “inadequacy of current law”^[3] the Californian Legislator acted and introduced the first anti-stalking legislation in 1990^[4].

Similar incidents in other American states soon led to amendments of other legislations. The ‘domino effect’ started, spreading nationwide at first, but then gaining ground and becoming international^[5].

This research paper concentrates on stalking in Australia. Firstly, it will present a general definition of stalking, followed by a short overview of empirical research into this issue. It will then – chronologically – examine the different anti-stalking legislations in this country. After such having gained a grasp of the concept of stalking in Australia, one can start to compare the various legislations.

Moreover, the research paper concerns present threats of stalking and thus bridges from the past (the 1990s) to the present (the 21st century)!

II. What is stalking?

It is difficult to define stalking because there are so many ways in which this threatening behaviour can manifest itself. Which actions can be subsumed under this criminal offence varies from legislation to legislation. Therefore, stalking cannot be easily described like most other crimes. But in deriving the smallest common denominator of all of the anti-stalking laws one can overall conclude that

stalking is “persistent and unwanted attention”^[6] of one person towards another.

Unlike the United States, especially California, where a high number of victims are still celebrities, in Australia stalking is commonly related to domestic violence^[7] and as such rarely reported to the police^[8]. Hence, surveys and crime statistics are not extensive with regard to the number of stalking cases but can give a general hint of this criminal offence’s dimension. The following findings of empirical research on stalking must therefore be considered against this background.

Paul Mullen, Michelle Pathé and Rosemary Purcell after having researched on issues of stalking came to the conclusion that there are five primary types of stalkers:

- The Rejected who respond to an unwelcome end to a close relationship^[9].
- The Resentful who respond to a perceived insult or injury by conduct aimed not just at revenge but at vindication^[10].
- The Predatory who pursue sexual gratification and control both in and through their stalking^[11].
- Intimacy Seekers who respond to loneliness by attempting to establish a close relationship^[12].
- The Incompetents who seek a relationship by methods that are at best counterpro-ductive and at worst terrifying.^[13]

The great majority of the stalking offences are committed by males whereas the victims are mostly women^[14]. Stalkers show a very high rate of recidivism^[15].

With regard to risk assessment, empirical research into stalking discovered that in ¾ of the cases the victim knew the offender, whereas only in ¼ of the cases the stalked person and the offender were unknown to each other^[16]. Moreover, it was found that the probability of violence rises with the intensity of relationship between victim and offender^[17].

III. Anti-Stalking Legislation in Australia

Australia considered its law to be inadequate to cope with this ‘new’ form of criminal behaviour^[18]. It concluded that since “much stalking behaviour is not criminal per se”^[19], the threshold for existing criminal offences like stealing^[20] property damage, assault^[21] and threat^[22] generally is not overstepped. However, there was a need to react to this new threat because stalking, although “outwardly innocent, [is] very threatening and disturbing to victims”^[23]. That this is true became tragically known in Australia when some women were murdered by their ex-intimates after being repeatedly stalked by them. The “public outrage accompanying these cases”^[24] then culminated in the implementation of anti-stalking legislation in Australia.

Queensland was the first state in Australia to introduce such a law^[25]. On 23 November 1993, it inserted s 359A into the Criminal Code 1899^[26] with the help of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1993 (Act No 65 of 1993). Soon, other Australian States followed this example. Today, stalking is an offence in every Australian jurisdiction^[27].

1. Queensland

Chapter 33A of the Queensland Criminal Code 1899 deals with unlawful stalking^[28]. Section 359B of the Code defines this term as a conduct engaged in on any one occasion if the conduct is protracted, or on more than one occasion^[29]. The fore-mentioned conduct must consist of at least one of any of the following acts: following, loitering near, watching or approaching a person; contacting a person; loitering near, watching or approaching a place where the person lives, works or visits; leaving offensive material where it will be found by, given to or brought to the attention of, a person; giving offensive material to a person, according to s 359B(c).

Under s 359B(a) of the Criminal Code (Qld), the unlawful stalking must be intentionally directed at the stalked person. However, it is immaterial whether the stalker intends that the stalked person be aware the conduct is directed at her or him as per s 359C(1)(a)^[30]. The stalker, moreover, does not need to have an intention as to cause the apprehension or fear, or the detriment, mentioned in Criminal Code (Qld) s 359C(4).

Under s 359D of the Code it is a “defence”^[31] if able to prove that the course of conduct was engaged in for the execution of a law or administration of an Act or for a purpose authorised by an Act; for the purpose of a genuine industrial, political or other public dispute or issue carried on in the public interest; or otherwise legitimate.

Unlawful stalking in Queensland bears a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment, as provided for by s 359E(2). In cases of an aggravated offence which is given if the stalker uses or intentionally threatens to use, violence against anyone or anyone’s property; possesses a weapon; or contravenes or intentionally threatens to contravene an injunction or order imposed or made legally by a court or tribunal, the maximum penalty is imprisonment for 7 years (s 359E(3) of the Code). The term “threatens” applies to threats whether by word or conduct as long as it is express^[32].

The fore-mentioned alternatives of aggravation of stalking are exhaustive, wherefore rape must not aggravate stalking. The reason for this is that on the one hand rape carries a greater penalty and on the other hand the accused shall not be punished twice for the same offence^[33] (this forming part of the protection against double jeopardy).

2. New South Wales

New South Wales enacted its anti-stalking legislation with the Crimes (Domestic Violence) Amendment Act 1993 and inserted ss 562 A and 562AB into the Crimes Act 1900. At first, stalking was limited to domestic relationships between the stalker and the stalked person. Since this provision proved to be too restrictive, it was amended in December 1994^[34] and is still valid today.

Stalking is defined in Crimes Act (NSW) s 562A(1) and comprises the same acts already mentioned in the foregoing legislations.

The offender must have the intent to cause fear, physical or mental harm, as per s 562AB of the Act. This fault element is specified in s 562AB(3) which states that the offender has the necessary intent if he or she knows that the conduct is likely to cause fear in the stalked person.

Under Crimes Act (NSW), in particular, s 562AB(1) stalking carries a maximum penalty of imprisonment for 5 years.

3. South Australia

In South Australia, the Criminal Law Consolidation (Stalking) Amendment Act 1994 (No 7) introduced a new criminal offence of stalking under Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) in s 19AA, which came into effect on 1 June 1994.

Under this section a person stalks another person if she/he engages in specific behaviour on at least two separate occasions. South Australia criminalises the same conduct as does the fore-mentioned legislation, but, moreover, the following: publishing or transmitting offensive material by means of the internet or some other form of electronic communication in such a way that the offensive material will be found by, or brought to the attention of, the other person. This is provided in s 19AA(1)(a)(iva) of the Act.

With regard to the fault element, the stalker must have the intention to cause serious physical or mental harm to the other person or a third person; or intention to cause serious apprehension or fear (s 19AA(1)(b)). The purpose of this mental element is to “reflect both the essential criminality of the behaviour and limit the offence to its target offenders”^[35]. Stalking, hence, has to be distinguished from cases where a person may act “outwardly similar” but lacks the fore-mentioned intention, such as “investigative journalism, residents picketing a demolition site or private detectives investigating Work Cover fraud”^[36]

Since the intention to cause serious physical or mental harm, apprehension or fear is difficult to establish, the South Australian Police formally warn the offender the first time they come to police attention that their behaviour causes serious physical or mental harm, apprehension or fear with the victim^[37]. If the offender continues with his behaviour nevertheless, he can be arrested and convicted because “from the prosecution perspective”^[38] the latter behaviour can be presented to the court as being intentional.

In South Australia, offensive behaviour under the Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA) s 7 may be used as an alternative verdict to stalking if the court is satisfied that such an offence has been committed (s 19AA(3) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act (SA)).

Under Criminal Law Consolidation Act (SA) s 19AA(4), (5) a person who has been acquitted or convicted on a charge of stalking may not be convicted of another offence arising out of the same set of circumstances and involving a physical element that is common to that charge and vice versa. This subsection was inserted to make sure that stalking only fills the gap in the already existing law^[39]. Moreover, it ensures that the offender will not be held dually responsible for the same act (protection against double jeopardy) although the latter is out of the fact that it states a general principle^[40] only declaratory.

In South Australia, stalking has a maximum penalty of 3 years imprisonment as per s 19AA(2)(b) of the Act^[41]. However, if the stalker contravened an injunction or an order imposed by a court; or if the offender was, on any occasion to which the charge relates, in possession of an offensive weapon he will be held criminally responsible for an aggravated offence of stalking which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment (Criminal Law Consolidation Act (SA) s 19AA(2)(a))^[42].

4. Victoria

In Victoria stalking is a criminal offence under s 21A of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic). This provision was introduced by the Crimes (Amendment) Act 1994.

Stalking is defined as the engagement in a course of conduct which means that the “relevant conduct must be conduct which is protracted or conduct which is engaged in on more than one separate occasion”^[43]. Most of the acts that fall under this kind of conduct are already mentioned above with regard to other jurisdictions. In addition to these, Victoria criminalises as stalking: publishing on the Internet or by an email or other electronic communication to any person a statement or other material; relating to, purporting to relate to, or to originate from, the victim or any other person; causing an unauthorized computer function; tracing the use of the Internet or of email or other electronic communication, as provided in s 21A(2).

Under s 21A(6) of the Act, it is immaterial that some or all of the course of conduct occurred outside Victoria, as long as the victim was in Victoria at the time the conduct occurred (principle of territoriality).

The stalker needs to have the intention of causing physical or mental harm to the victim or of arousing apprehension or fear in the victim for his or her own safety or that of any other person, as per s 21A(2) of the Act. Under Crimes Act (Vic) s 21A(3) the offender has the fore-mentioned intention, if he knows that engaging in a course of conduct of that kind would be likely to cause such harm or arouse such apprehension or fear; or the offender in all the particular circumstances ought to have understood that engaging in a course of conduct of that kind would be likely to cause such harm or arouse such apprehension or fear and it actually did have that result (objective reasonable person test^[44]). The intention can be established by an admission made by the offender or by inference from relevant circumstances^[45].

[...]

---

^[1] Robert A Guy, ‘The Nature and Constitutionality of Stalking Laws’, Vanderbilt Law Reviews 46 (1993) 991 at 991-992.

^[2] Ibid.

^[3] Robert A Guy, supra n 1, p. 992.

^[4] California Penal Code s 646.9(a) which reads “Any person who wilfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or wilfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety for his or her immediate family is guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars (US $ 1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison.”

^[5] In the lead were Canada, Australia and England.

^[6] Karen Whitney, ‘Western Australia’s New Stalking Legislation: Will it Fill the Gap?’, University of Western Australia Law Review 28 (2) July 1999, p. 293 at 294; Jayne Marshall, Stalking in South Australia, The criminal justice response, Attorney-General’s Department, Government of Australia, Office of Crime Statistics, Information Bulletin No 25 (August 2001), p. 1at 1; emphasis added by the author.

^[7] Matthew Goode, ‘Stalking: Crime of the Nineties?’, Criminal Law Journal 19 (1995) 21 at 21; MCCOC, Chapter 5: Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person, Discussion Paper (August 1996) p. 1 at 39; R A Swanwick, ‘Stalkees Strike Back – the Stalkers Stalked: A Review of the First Two Years of Stalking Legislation in Queensland’, University of Queensland Law Journal 19 (1996) 26 at 27; Sally Kift, ‘Stalking in Queensland: From the Nineties to Y2K’, Bond Law Review 11 (1999) 144 at 145.

^[8] Jayne Marshall, Stalking in South Australia, The criminal justice response, Attorney-General’s Department, Government of Australia, Office of Crime Statistics, Information Bulletin No 25 (August 2001), p. 1 at 3; Emma Ogilvie speaks of a percentage around 50%, see: Emma Ogilvie, Stalking: Policing and Prosecuting Practices in three Australian Jurisdictions, Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice (176) (November 2000), p. 1 at 4.

^[9] Paul E Mullen, Michele Pathé and Rosemary Purcell, Stalkers and Their Victims (2000) 79.

^[10] Paul E Mullen, Michele Pathé and Rosemary Purcell, supra n 9, p. 90-91.

^[11] Paul E Mullen, Michele Pathé and Rosemary Purcell, Stalkers and Their Victims (2000) 99.

^[12] Paul E Mullen, Michele Pathé and Rosemary Purcell, supra n 11, p. 117-118.

^[13] Paul E Mullen, Michele Pathé and Rosemary Purcell, supra n 11, p. 123.

^[14] Robert A Guy, ‘The Nature and Constitutionality of Stalking Laws’, Vanderbilt Law Reviews 46 (1993) 991 at 994; Jayne Marshall, Stalking in South Australia, The criminal justice response, Attorney-General’s Department, Government of Australia, Office of Crime Statistics, Information Bulletin No 25, August 2001, p. 1 at 5; Miriam Gani, ‘Stalking and cyberstalking: crimes against privacy?’, Legaldate 14 (3) July 2002, p. 7 at 7; Hansard, Vic Council, Crimes (Stalking) Bill, 02/12/2003, p. 2003 (Hon. H. E. Buckingham).

^[15] In one study, 46% of the offenders charged with stalking had a history of prior convictions for the same offence, sometimes with the same victim, see: Ronnie B Harmon, Richard Rosner and Howard Owens, ‘Obses-sional Harassment and Erotomania in a Criminal Court Population’, Journal of Forensic Sciences (1995) 40 (2), p. 188 at 194. Although this study was based on only 48 cases wherefore it is not representative, it can generally hint towards the right direction.

^[16] Barry Rosenfeld and Ronny Harmon, ‘Factors Associated with Violence in Stalking and Obsessional Harass-ment Cases’, Criminal Justice and Behavior 29 (2002) 671 at 681; Jayne Marshall comes to similar results in: Jayne Marshall, Stalking in South Australia, The criminal justice response, Attorney-General’s Department, Government of Australia, Office of Crime Statistics, Information Bulletin No 25 (August 2001), p. 1 at 6.

^[17] Family members (62%), former spouses/partners/intimates (51%), acquaintance/business relationship (25%) and strangers (8%), see: Barry Rosenfeld and Ronny Harmon, ‘Factors Associated with Violence in Stalking and Obsessional Harassment Cases’, Criminal Justice and Behavior 29 (2002) 671 at 683; Russell E Palarea et al, ‘The Dangerous Nature of Intimate Relationship Stalking: Threats, Violence and Associated Risk Factors’, Behavioral Sciences and the Law 17 (1999) 269 at 276, 278.

^[18] Matthew Goode, ‘Stalking: Crime of the Nineties?’, Criminal Law Journal 19 (1995) 21 at 24; Karen Whit-ney, ‘Western Australia’s New Stalking Legislation: Will it Fill the Gap?’, University of Western Australia Law Review 28 (2) July 1999, p. 293 at 296.

^[19] Karen Whitney, supra n 18, p. 294.

^[20] Karen Whitney, ‘Western Australia’s New Stalking Legislation: Will it Fill the Gap?’, University of Western Australia Law Review 28 (2) July 1999, p. 293 at 294.

^[21] Ibid; Jayne Marshall, Stalking in South Australia, The criminal justice response, Attorney-General’s Depart-ment, Government of Australia, Office of Crime Statistics, Information Bulletin No 25 (August 2001), p. 1 at 1.

^[22] Matthew Goode, ‘Stalking: Crime of the Nineties?’, Criminal Law Journal 19 (1995) 21 at 24; R A Swan-wick, ‘Stalkees Strike Back – the Stalkers Stalked: A Review of the First Two Years of Stalking Legislation in Queensland’, University of Queensland Law Journal 19 (1996) 26 at 26; Karen Whitney, ‘Western Australia’s New Stalking Legislation: Will it Fill the Gap?’, University of Western Australia Law Review 28 (2) July 1999, p. 293 at 294.

^[23] Jayne Marshall, Stalking in South Australia, The criminal justice response, Attorney-General’s Department, Government of Australia, Office of Crime Statistics, Information Bulletin No 25 (August 2001), p. 1 at 1; see also: Karen Whitney, supra n 22, p. 294; quite similar also: Matthew Goode, ‘Stalking: Crime of the Nineties?’, Criminal Law Journal 19 (1995) 21 at 24.

^[24] Paul E Mullen, Michele Pathé and Rosemary Purcell, Stalkers and Their Victims (2000) 269.

^[25] R A Swanwick, ‘Stalkees Strike Back – the Stalkers Stalked: A Review of the First Two Years of Stalking Legislation in Queensland’, University of Queensland Law Journal 19 (1996) 26 at 26; Sally Kift, ‘Stalking in Queensland: From the Nineties to Y2K’, Bond Law Review 11 (1999) 144 at 144, 146.

^[26] This section has been completely recast and such repealed by the Criminal Code (Stalking) Amendment Act 1999 (No 18 of 1999) which inserted a new Chapter 33A (Unlawful Stalking) into the Criminal Code (Qld). The latter is still valid today.

^[27] Jonathan Clough and Carmel Mulhern, Criminal Law, Butterworth Tutorial Series (1999), [2.3.29], p. 36; Law Book Company, Laws of Australia, John A Riordan (ed) (1996) vol 10: Criminal Offences, 10.2 – Assault and Related Offences, Title Editor: Paul Ames Fairall, [12]; Sally Kift, ‘Stalking in Queensland: From the Nineties to Y2K’, Bond Law Review 11 (1999) 144 at 144.

^[28] The Queensland legislation as well as the legislation of other Australian States can be found in the Appendix.

^[29] The old Criminal Code (Qld) s 359A required a course of conduct which the courts held to be at least two incidents of stalking, both on which the jury must unanimously agree and which therefore must be proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution, see: R v Hubbuck [1999] 1 Qd R 314 at 315 (Pincus JA).

^[30] For a contrary opinion prior to the Amendment of this section see: Law Book Company, Laws of Australia, John A Riordan (ed) (1996) vol 10, Criminal Offences: 10.2 – Assault and Related Offences, Title Editor: Paul Ames Fairall, [12] Part G – Stalking and Intimidation; R A Swanwick, ‘Stalkees Strike Back – the Stalkers Stalked: A Review of the First Two Years of Stalking Legislation in Queensland’, University of Queensland Law Journal 19 (1996) 26 at 29.

^[31] Law Book Company, Laws of Australia, John A Riordan (ed) (1996) vol 10, Criminal Offences: 10.2 – Assault and Related Offences, Title Editor: Paul Ames Fairall, [12] Part G – Stalking and Intimidation; Sally Kift, ‘Stalking in Queensland: From the Nineties to Y2K’, Bond Law Review 11 (1999) 144 at 154.

^[32] R v Allie [1999] 1 Qd R 618 at 625 (Fryberg J).

^[33] R v Fyduniw [1996] QCA 322 (3 September 1996) (Williams J), <http://www.austlii.edu. au/cgibin/disp.pl/au/ cases/qld/QCA/1996/322.html?query=%22r%22+and+%22v%22+and+%22fyduniw%22>.

^[34] R A Swanwick, ‘Stalkees Strike Back – the Stalkers Stalked: A Review of the First Two Years of Stalking Legislation in Queensland’, University of Queensland Law Journal 19 (1996) 26 at 40.

^[35] Hansard, SA Legislative Council, Criminal Law Consolidation (Stalking) Amendment Bill, 16/02/1994, (Hon K T Griffin, Attorney-General); Hansard, SA House of Assembly, Criminal Law Consolidation (Stalking) Amendment Bill, 10/03/1994 (Hon D S Baker, Minister for Mines and Energy).

^[36] Jayne Marshall, Stalking in South Australia, The criminal justice response, Attorney-General’s Department, Government of Australia, Office of Crime Statistics, Information Bulletin No 25 (August 2001), p. 1.

^[37] South Australian Police Commissioners Circular No. 458 quoted after: Jayne Marshall, Stalking in South Australia, The criminal justice response, Attorney-General’s Department, Government of Australia, Office of Crime Statistics, Information Bulletin No 25 (August 2001), p. 1 at 2.

^[38] Jayne Marshall, supra n 37, p. 2.

^[39] Hansard, SA House of Assembly, Criminal Law Consolidation (Stalking) Amendment Bill, 10/03/1994 (Hon D S Baker, Minister for Mines and Energy); Matthew Goode, ‘Stalking: Crime of the Nineties?’, Criminal Law Journal 19 (1995), p. 21 at 26.

^[40] Law Book Company, Laws of Australia, John A Riordan (ed) (1993) vol 9: Criminal Law Principles, Title Editor: Brent Fisse, 9.1 [294].

^[41] Under the Statutes Amendment and Repeal (Aggravated Offences) Bill 2003 the penalty for the basic offence can be found in s 19AA(2)(a).

^[42] Under the Statutes Amendment and Repeal (Aggravated Offences) Bill 2003 the penalty for the basic offence can be found in s 19AA(2)(b).

^[43] Gunes v Pearson (1996) 89 A Crim R 297 at 306 (McDonald J); Berlyn v Brouskos [2002] VSC 377 (9 September 2002) (Nettle J), <http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgibin/disp.pl/au/cases/vic/VSC/2002/377.html?query= % 7e+stalking>.

^[44] Amanda Pearce and Patricia Easteal, ‘The ‘Domestic’ in Stalking’, Alternative Law Journal (1999) 24 (4) 165 at 168.

^[45] Gunes v Pearson (1996) 89 A Crim R 297 at 307 (McDonald J).