Taking a photo of a woman at the supermarket's not stalking
Taking a photo of a woman at the supermarket, posting it on social media and saying you think said woman is beautiful and you'd like to meet her is not stalking.
Yesterday a young man made national headlines when he did his mate a favour and tried to track down a girl he liked the look, of by posting a photo of her on Woolworths' Facebook page.
Today anti-domestic-violence-campaigner Betty Taylor and News.com.au journalist Rashell Habib labelled this behaviour as "stalking."
Firstly let's start with logic.
The dictionary defines stalking as pursuing or approaching something - usually prey - with stealth.
The young man these women have called a stalker has not really pursued the woman in a literal sense and he certainly did not act with any form of stealth - his story is national news and I'm pretty sure she knows what he's up to.
Secondly there was certainly no indication he intended her any form of harm.
In Queensland Section 359A of the Criminal Code sets out the definitions for where a person's conduct can be defined as stalking.
(A) Creates apprehension or fear of violence
(B) Leads to serious mental, psychological or emotional harm
(C) Prevents or hinders a person from doing something they are lawfully entitled to do.
There's absolutely zero indication the young men involved in this had any inclination towards violence and there's nothing to suggest they caused harm.
Finally if the girl wanted them to leave her alone and was too embarrassed to say so, there were about 10,000 journalists waiting to tell her tale.
And our follow up story suggests she wasn't too scared to return to the supermarket.
RELATED COVERAGE: Mystery 'girl of his dreams' apparently turns up at Woolies.
To characterise this behaviour as stalking does nothing but undermine the credibility of those making the claims.