australia stalking
Can stalking be charged for a one time threat in Victoria (Australia)
<p>My friend has been charged with <em>Stalking</em> under <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ca195882/s21a.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 21A of the Crimes Act 1958</a>. The charge is</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The accused engaged in a course of conduct, giving offensive material to the victim or any other person or leaving it where it will be found by, given to or brought to the attention of, the victim or the other person to intentionally cause physical or mental harm to the victim, including self-harm or to arouse apprehension or fear in the victim for his or her own safety or that of any other person.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The &quot;offense&quot; has happened only one time. His lawyer said even though it happened once it is sufficient to prove that it is stalking, but I researched on many sites and it has been mentioned that the <em>course of conduct</em> <strong>must</strong> constitute continued behaviour, which must have happened more than once. Following are the references:</p>
<ol>
<li><p><a href="https://www.gotocourt.com.au/criminal-law/vic/stalking-offences/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.gotocourt.com.au/criminal-law/vic/stalking-offences/</a> -- what must the prosecution prove sections n.</p>
</li>
<li><p>/#10 in <a href="https://www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/eManuals/CCB/46773.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/eManuals/CCB/46773.htm</a></p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Please tell me if the conduct did not happen more than once, is it sufficient to prove no guilt for stalking in Victoria, Australia?</p>

<h2>Depends on the conduct</h2>

<p>Stalking in Victorian law is a very broad offence encompassing a wide range of conduct. Demonstrating a “course of action” is critical to an offence: one or two phone calls is unlikely to be a “course of action” but following someone once could be.</p>

<p>Of course, police or the DPP can charge a person with a crime if they reasonably think a jury might convict. They can be wrong about that.</p>
