Cyberstalking and hacking-
One of the most significant implications of cyberstalking contrasting regular stalking is that
there is no safe place to hide for the victim. Additionally, stalking can take place permanently
and anonymously due to the Internet (National Centre for Cyberstalking Research, 2015).
Cyberstalking is usually directed against one person in particular; blocking and removing the
stalker does not always work. This is due to the anonymity of the internet and the various
online platforms perpetrators can use to contact their victims. The internet is always active
so it is impossible to simply monitor cyberstalking. Victims suffer from paranoia, insomnia,
depression, PTSD and physical injuries (Spitzberg and Hoobler, 2002).
Despite many offences falling into the category of cybercrime, cyberstalking appears to be
the most widespread (Bocij, 2004) – especially considering cyberstalking studies have
considerably increased since the beginning of the twenty-first century. It was acknowledged
as a widescale issue in 1999 by the US federal government when the first state law
recognising cyberstalking was introduced in California. After this, many other states followed
and by 2008, 48 other states had some form of cyberstalking legislation (Fisher and Lab,
2010).
In the UK, anti-stalking legislation was created in the form of the ‘Protection from
Harassment Act 1997’, introduced in June due to massive press coverage and public fear on
cyberstalking and a perception of it as an extension of regular stalking (Pathé, 2002).
However, public concern regarding the inadequacy of this act led to the creation of the
‘Protection of Freedoms Act 2012’, which covered a more extensive range of stalking
offences and focused on the trauma caused (Pathé, 2002). This act made stalking a specific
offence and included the safeguarding of vulnerable groups and the ban of certain
processing of biometric information relating to children.
A theory to frame both hacking and cyberstalking is Cohen and Felson’s ‘routine activity
theory’ (RAT) developed in 1979 – which applies to both real world crimes and cybercrimes
(Yar, 2005). It examines trends that are crucial for crime to occur - in particular when three
factors occur together at the same time and in the same space: a motivated offender,
suitable target and lack of guardianship. RAT is also flexible and adapts to social change
(Piquero, 2016). As part of this theory, criminal intent is assumed; all individuals are
expected to possess sufficient motivation to commit illegal acts if the circumstances permit
(Cohen and Felson, 1979: 589). Kreming and Sharp Parker (2017) add that a motivated
offender will always move to a new target if a suitable one fails to exist. Leukfeldt and Yar
(2016) explain that there is no short supply of motivated offenders in an online environment
– such as pirates, stalkers and hackers.