Stalking charges have increased dramatically over the past decade, partly because technology now enables persistent contact and partly because legal definitions of stalking have expanded. A person accused of stalking may not fully understand why their actions are considered criminal. Yet stalking convictions carry serious penalties—imprisonment, protective orders, and a criminal record that affects employment and housing—so understanding the law and building an effective criminal defense is essential.
Louisiana’s Stalking Statute
Under La. R.S. 14:40.2, stalking is generally defined as a pattern of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to feel alarmed or to suffer emotional distress, including by placing that person in fear for their safety. The statute has been revised repeatedly to address cyberstalking and newer forms of harassment.
Elements of Stalking
To prove stalking, the prosecution must generally establish a pattern of behavior rather than a single act; that the conduct was directed at a specific person rather than the public generally; and that the conduct caused the alleged victim reasonable fear or emotional distress. What counts as a “pattern” is sometimes ambiguous, and courts have struggled to define exactly how many contacts are required.
Types of Conduct Constituting Stalking
Traditional stalking conduct includes following or appearing at a person’s home, workplace, or school; repeated calls or messages; surveillance; sending unwanted gifts or letters; and making intimidating statements. Increasingly, stalking occurs online—through repeated messages or posts, fake accounts created to monitor or contact someone, publishing private information without consent, or monitoring a person’s location or accounts without authorization. It can also arise in the workplace through repeated unwanted contact despite clear rejections.
Defenses to Stalking Charges
Challenge the “Pattern” Requirement
Stalking requires a pattern, not isolated incidents. If the evidence shows only one or two non-threatening contacts—for example, a few messages to an ex asking to discuss a breakup—that may not constitute a pattern warranting criminal prosecution.
Challenge the Alleged Victim’s Fear or Distress
The statute requires that the alleged victim reasonably fear for their safety or suffer genuine emotional distress. Where the victim cannot articulate a specific, reasonable fear—particularly when no threats were made and the defendant left when asked—this element can be challenged directly.
Challenge Causation and Offer Innocent Explanations
The conduct must actually cause the fear or distress, which is difficult to prove without clear testimony tying specific conduct to specific fear. Cross-examination can probe when the alleged victim first became afraid, what conduct caused it, and what other stressors were present. Many forms of repeated contact also have innocent explanations: a shared workplace or community, legitimate business such as resolving shared finances or retrieving property, or discussing shared children. If contact was incidental or justified, it is not stalking.
First Amendment and Lack of Knowledge
Some conduct that superficially resembles stalking may be protected speech, and courts have at times been reluctant to criminalize unpopular or emotional expression. In addition, if you did not know your conduct was causing fear or distress—because the alleged victim never said so and there was no reason to know—that undermines the charge.
Challenges in Stalking Prosecutions
Stalking cases are complicated by partly subjective fear standards, where the alleged victim’s perception is central even when it seems unreasonable to others. Social media adds further complexity: when platforms are designed for public interaction, it is not always clear whether seeing a public post amounts to “contact.” Stalking charges are also frequently paired with alleged violations of protective orders, creating a spiral in which each charge is used to support the other.
Practical Defense Strategy
A strong defense often begins by examining the alleged victim’s motivations. In many cases the accuser has reasons to characterize contact as stalking—ending a relationship, gaining leverage in a custody dispute, or preempting complaints you might make about their own conduct. Documenting your version of events contemporaneously, establishing legitimate reasons for any contact, and scrutinizing whether police investigated both sides fairly are all critical to protecting your rights.
Collateral Consequences of a Stalking Conviction
Beyond criminal penalties, a stalking conviction can lead to employment and housing discrimination, be used against you in custody disputes, create immigration consequences for non-citizens, and result in the denial of professional licenses for teachers, lawyers, and others.
Conclusion
Stalking charges call for a careful defense that challenges the pattern element, the reasonableness of the alleged victim’s fear, and the causal link between conduct and fear. Contact that is innocent or justified can be mischaracterized as stalking, and aggressive defense is necessary to protect your future. Contact The Ambeau Law Firm to discuss your case.