Here’s more about the elements of stalking, in one US state, and here is advice from the Crown Prosecution Service. As you can imagine, a “gang” of stalkers will be a similar set of procedures for establishing the elements of your case.
But why should personal injury attorney’s, criminal defense attorney’s, civil liberties groups, and other parties sue in these cases–what’s “in it” for you? I will tell you: these cases are the future of democracy, and yes, due to the way that we can trace these cases to HUGE parties who are liable, there is money to be made. But I hope that is not your only motivator for searching the internet for “Caselaw on gangstalking the elements behind it.”
Indeed, I can show you about two hundred more valuable search terms, use my contact feature and send an email. I have researched this for over 15 years, and have deployed ROGS Analysis in many cases, some of which are now in court rooms.
And the parties that can be sued range from individuals-many of whom are quite wealthy. In my research I have found many people who own huge companies building infrasructure in the US and elsewhere, and many real estate agents who participate–at the executive level, as we saw in the eBay case. I have found aviators who own helicopter leasing firms–you might note that your client complains of helicopters being used to harass them, and indeed I can NAME people who lease copters to “gang stalkers,” too.
These groups are all over the place in police and sheriffs departments, local and state governments, community organizations, townhome associations, corporations–as you see, these cases those who “do” the gang stalking are a wide range of individuals and groups, and often work together in these horrific stalking events. But even federal prosecutors are willing to take up these cases if the injured party provides a baseline of proof, as we saw with the eBay gang of stalkers, that includes upper level executives, and many former police.
Yet most of these current cases fail, due to lack of evidence, and especially improper citation; and also that judges likely roll their eyes when they encounter the sort of gibberish online about these cases that is intentionally put there to Google bomb the results with bizarre claims of “aliens! directed energy weapons!! MKULTRA!!! FLAT EARTH!!! LIZARD PEOPLE!!!!”
That gibberish is littering the internet due to people like these, and the many other well funded organizations and individuals like Targeted Justice, or Dr. Tomo Shibata that use donor funds to perpetrate hoaxes. Their cases are designed to look foolish, and are frequently tied to one or another federal money pot, like “it’s for the children!” and “domestic violence (highly gendered narratives)” and especially “human trafficking!!” which is just the same old anti-prostitution gang in modern context–these people do not give a single shit about Guatemalan/Ecuadoran/Peruvian/Columbian dish washers, toilet scrubbers, roofers, and ditch diggers who rode “north” in a tanker truck fuel tank, because many of them utilize those men as labor.
SO: where to look for case law, and decisions regarding gang stalking? Its best of you first know where NOT to look. DON’T search for cases where “gang stalking” is the claim, because these cases are almost ALWAYS found in “conspiracy of deprivation of civil rights” or “neighborhood disputes” or”deprivation under color of law,” or in civil settlements about dead men, like Eric Gardner, who was the first black man who famously uttered “I can’t breathe” as a police gang murdered him in cold blood as cameras rolled; and that which kicked off the riots and protests around the USA,about various forms of “torture” as used by modern policing.
These new forms of torture, and police brutality are informed by intelligence agency derived tactics, including psychological operations, and much of it is outsourced to “private contractors” like private investigators and other non-police groups (the Anti Defamation League, for example, is responsible for much of the mayhem that masquerades online as “fighting hate speech” but when litigated–if such can be proven–is in fact simple cyber stalking.)
SO, gang stalking lawsuits are that: framed differently within the known parameters of cases and court filings centered around case law of police brutality, because the dirty work is out sourced to others, who masquerade as “private interests” despite their very public, very government funded functions.
Look here, where Ahmaud Arbery’s mother sued a gang comprised of “police and prosecutors, a retired police investigator, his son, and a neighbor” for “conspiracy” to deprive her son of his rights, and eventually, his life.
In all, they had stalked Arbery for several years, and at one point tried to brutalize him by shooting him with a Taser, totally unprovoked, and that, caught on film. Its tough to watch, as these cowards target an unarmed man with his hands in the air, but seasoned attorney’s will know exactly what this is. Watch the video, and see “gang stalking” in action, and that, before the courts now as a “conspiracy of deprivation” lawsuit.
And here, where a man named Everton Brown attempted–and failed–to sue the FBI for vague violations of his civil liberty. That case failed predictably, because while the FBI and its “Infragard” agents in the “community policing” schemes are indeed part of it, that is a hard sell to most judges. But: gang stalking litigation opens new doors for discovery, and that is where the hard road to building caselaw begins.
Brown sued the wrong party in his initial pro se filing, because he should have sued his town home association for records, and then sued the city to enforce noise ordinances, and worked up from there, but his initial claims were pretty absurd on their face, though not at all a false portrayal of what gang stalking is. Sadly, he went on a rampage, instead of collecting evidence, such as films, photo’s and other data.
Keep in mind, that sheriffs departments, local police, and others who are gang stalking citizens say that they will harass the individuals until the “sue or move away.” Justice is seldom possible in these cases because of the prohibitive cost of suing the state, and gangs of state stalkers know this, and use it to their advantage. They also target individuals who cannot show “loss” in these cases, as many individuals for example cannot claim they have lost income, because by the time they discover this mad scheme, they have been stalked out of a job, and in many cases, locked up under 5150/Baker Act/false psychological holds, as we saw in the case of police whistle blower Adrian Schoolcraft.
Read It: So, Who’s Crazy Now? The story of Adrian Schoolcraft, who settled for a gang stalking incident, and never took it to trial, leaving other victims without evidence of how gangs of police stalkers work their subterfuge.
Keith LaBella, Esq. writes Gangstalkingismurder.com, and was perhaps the first legitimate complainant to suggest that Federal RICO statutes be applied to these cases, and we now see prosecutors and other attorney’s doing exactly that too, in the Pasco County cases mentioned above, or the case of the eBay Gang of Stalkers; or the recent Department of Justice filing against Ramajana Hidic Demirovic, a Democrat party operative who was stalking three teenage boys for many years.
But case law on this topic is scarce, because most gang stalking lawsuits are filed by relatives of the people murdered in these cases, or by parties like myself, who decided to settle a lawsuit, instead of proceed* because the stalking is exactly that intense, and destabilizing. I sued a security company that was working with the local vice squad and several other parties in what is called a “colliding parallel investigation,” aka “gang stalking.” Five others also sued that company and we put it out of business.
SO, gang stalking lawsuits are not called “gang stalking lawsuits,” because the victims of this sordid practice are merely using the terms of the stalkers themselves–as “gang stalking” is the term of the stalkers, which they flaunt online in bizarre ways. In the law, however, there are other names for it, and we see these cases more clearly.
One case to look at as a sort of primitive template that attempted to outline the elements of the various crimes that happen during gang stalking is the failed Jeffrey Kantor lawsuit, which, like many of these lawsuits, is stymied when it comes to using proper language and citing evidence, and especially in discovery, where judges are hesitant to admit state collected evidence from Fusion Centers who have monitored these targeted individuals.
The claims Kantor made ring true to any targeted individual, but taken as a whole comes across any judges bench looking incomplete, and vague, in need of more proof and so on, and the quagmire of Fusion Centers hiding the evidence ball and in what capacity they acted in such cases will be an emerging field of law as American’s are saddled with the monstrosity of constant surveillance.
Another good example is how Rick and Cindy Krlich sued a gang of stalkers in Hubbard Ohio, in a case featured on national television, called “Small Town Terrorism” and obtained restraining orders against many, many local shitbags, one of which, Dick Wittenkugle, turned out to be a fraudster who was milking the town till, and calling in fake fires. Apparently, hero’s double dip AND steal from the town till. Don’t Be a Dick! Don’t Be a Dickwitt!
Now, a word of caution: the tribal-sectarian Southern Poverty Law Center has rolled out the the “PASCO” (People Against Surveillance of Children and Overpolicing) Coalition, and provides one narrowly tailored and reedy measure of legal remedy for gang stalking, but as almost anything that the SPLC is known for , its a bit late in the game, as they are known for race pandering, and punting on most difficult social matters, and even then, their effort panders to the lowest denominator by taking up the case “for the children” when in fact these programs mostly target adults.
Apparently the SPLC is “OK with that,” because they themselves have been implicated by some as political gang stalkers, as noted almost as early as the case where that organizations founder was alleged to have unethical relations with his step daughter or something–and then, like a cricket with a worm in its head, they went full zionist/racist/fake-justice crusader after that. In my dealings with that group, I seem to remember Morris Dee’s as a grand standing do-nothing, who had a HUGE political budget, but took NO real cases of merit.
….post in progress, check back later