Depends on where she lives or works. Stickney is part of the sprawling metropolis region of the Chicagoland area, not a village in the middle of nowhere, so if she doesn’t have to go there - and I personally recommend against going as the stench from the Water Reclamation Plant can be smelled miles away (I’ve done it when the wind is right.. er, wrong), then she can avoid him in that respect.
It was mentioned on the news this morning, though I don’t have a cite, that there are laws against government workers using personal information gathered through their workplace. It may well be not only within her rights, but also not unexpected, for someone in her situation to file suit in a case like this.
Yes, he shouldn’t have used a restricted database to look up her address. However, there are other ways to find a person’s address, such as Googling her name. So first I’d like to see proof that he looked her name up in the database, which is definitely a no-no.
However, I think that his note was charming. And I read at least one account that said that she actually dated him once. So I’d like all the facts to come out. Only when we can see the full picture can we really make a determination as to who is the creepiest in this scenario.
Maybe it was a little weird to leave a note on the car but I bet he thought it was less intrusive than calling her.
Sort of reminds me of a time when a man I had met socially a few times called me to ask me out, he “confessed” to getting my number by peeking at the Rolodex ( this was many years ago) of a mutual friend. I didn’t find it creepy at all, it was probably preferable to him asking my friend for his number then having him ask me if it was OK to give the him my number etc.
I went out with him a few times, no fireworks but nothing creepy either.
I work for a financial institution. While we don’t have a policy per se against dating clients or vendors (provided no conflict of interest exists) looking up information in our computer system for such purpose (or any purpose not directly rellated to business) would result in termination on the spot even without actually contacting the customer. If the cop looked her up in a police database, or even copied her name of police paperwork to google he should be fired, end of story.
Yeah, I just looked it up on Google Maps and this town is only a couple of miles north of Chicago’s Midway Airport. This is a pretty dense area and the town is bordered on all sides. It’s not a small farming community.
If a male Doper left a note on a female Doper’s car window **once **without having had any prior communications, or exchanged any information about each other’s location, other than normal and public SDMB posts?
As Loach wrote above, there must be at least two acts for stalking to have taken place. Also, one must also be in reasonable fear for their safety or the safety of a family member for stalking to have occurred in most, if not all, states. This is true for IL where this took place.
If he wanted to ask her out, he should have done it when he met her in person. It would be weird and somewhat inappropriate but not creepy or stalkerish (note the ish…we aren’t saying he IS a stalker, we are saying it’s the type of behaviour we would associate with one).
Looking up her name in a work-related database is already crossing one line. It simply isn’t appropriate and it isn’t a normal way to try and meet people.
Going to her home when she wasn’t there, tracking down her vehicle in an apartment parking lot and leaving a note is another line. Again, it isn’t a normal way to try and meet people, particularly people who you haven’t really “met” outside of a brief professional interaction.
He is a cop - a person in a position of authority (and armed at that, though that’s not necessarily an issue). Such a person is often intimidating to begin with, because of their role in society. When a person in an authoritative, intimidating role tracks you down without your knowledge in order to ask for a date - something that always has a sexual component to it, even if it’s very little - that can be very scary.
Again, he didn’t simply ask her out on a date. He behaved in ways that are inappropriate, outside the norm and potentially quite intimidating, and did so outside her home, where you should feel the safest.
It’s stalkerish behaviour. It’s not just an unwanted advance.
Could a cop tell that someone is available, ie, a single and/or not living with anyone, just by giving them a speeding ticket or can they look up info as such? Or shouldn’t the possibilities like her husband or possible live-in boyfriend finding the note instead of her any concern at all? Do we think that he simply decided to go to her address, without knowing any further info or whether she might be home or not (ie, her car being in the packing lot), and just happened to find that her car there? Or did it take a bit more work?
I don’t see how we even know that he knew her address. I mean, I presume her address is on her driver’s license, which I presume she presented to him when the ticket was issued. So the next day he’s consumed with thoughts of this woman and tries to remember the address he had just glanced at the day before. Surely remembering what you saw yesterday isn’t against policy. Ah shit, was 732 Pine, or 723? Maybe I’ll just cruise down Pine Street and see if I recognize her car.
shrug Leaving a note on my car isn’t evidence that you have used a proprietary database to find my address, or even that you know what my address is. It’s just evidence that you found my car.
Well. this is more common than one might think. As for "Work related: database… thats called the state crime index center… hence in Georgia it’s the GCIC… and when i look you up for non professional reasons that’s suppose to result in my immediate termination.
This pales in comparison of the genius who decided to sneak into another guy’s cop car and run Barack Obama on a namecheck… suffice to say the President came back clear… and the Secret Service came by for a visit!!
I can not say for sure about all 50 states. But here in NJ the statute very specifically uses terms like “repeatedly” and “a course of action”. As a police officer who has charged people with stalking I guarantee here it has to be more than one occasion.